CONCILIATION BOARD.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11188, 10 August 1898, Page 2

CONCILIATION BOARD.

DISPUTE IN THE tftIRNiTU-RE TRADE. •A meeting of the Conciliation Board was ■ ! held at the Supreme Court yesterday for the pyi'pose-..0f considering an industrial dispute i between the Dunedin i. United' Furniture : Trades Union and the Eurniture. Employers' ! Association. The members-of-the board present were—Messrs W. A;,. Sim (chairman),. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., R. Ferguson,.G. P. Far- . quhdiy and G. L. Sise. " Messrs W. H6od: and'A. Butterfieid peared for the union* and' the employers were represented by Messrs R. Chisholm F. A.) Hooper,'and J. J. Mavlow. ,'.'.' '• .. The following are the nlem.bers.of the Employers'. Association :.-r-~!\les6rs ■ Brmide}! and -Hayward, Mackenzie and Sanders,, Scoullav ..and Chisholm, Ellis and Smyth, F. A. Hooper w.ul po., J. Parker, P. Adamson, John Swan, John Gillies, "Alexander. Watt; — Muller, ■. E. T. Ward, A. C. Stewart, W. Nees, J. J. Mar-low. ' '■" ..,'■' " " ■ i, The individual firms) and employers joined jin the dispute'were :-^A.Lojie and Co*,- A. Nelson, F: M'Donalcl,' -^ Taylbr, — :! Cuttle T - I M'Laughlini. Thomas ..Brp^yn, .—; Swan,,-. : .— : I Manning, P. Laing,1 F. Mariin.W. G. Fiies,.,, j G v Fleury, — .Rqbsoni F, G. Biitterfield,' J,. : Campbell, andiAl.aud--F/Iriglis; ' ,""',', ....1 j -jlhe ' following cqnd^ions. of etoployment' ■ were asked for by the'iinion;:-^: ''.''' ■ 11. Tliat the minimum wage for cabinetmakers, chairmakers, 'and iVfiholsferera fca ijine shillings \ (9s) per/day; French polishers,1 elgi;» rrr.-\~r.jj -^s)' per day—all the prices in exhibits A B and G to be "paid for 'piecework,':"1 ' ' 2. Twenty per cent, tci.'be.the maximum to be. deducted for machine work on cabinetmakers' iog, 10 per cent, to be the maxi- , mum deducted fos.piachine yvork on chairmakers' log. 3. Overtime between the hours of 5.30 p.m. and a a.m:: Time and a quarter tobe paid up till 8 p.m., and-time and a half from 8 p.m. till 8 a.m.' ' :.' ', 4. Th"e> employer shall notify the men whether ■■. . they . are. on piece or day. work;,before ! ■ .starting their jobof.. -.■• .:■; , . ■..' , . 5. Men ,to t have' the option of 'wofkuig by the ; ... piece.' .. ;. -. ;' '■' " '■'". -; '"■'■ j 6. :Unionisis: to' have th'eprefereiice:6f employ- i meat over non-unionists.'■•'. : ■ ' 7. Cabinetmakers employed on chair.work to be paid, the same aa.chairmake.vs.. . . . 8. Special lines not mentioned, in the logs, to ;■ be settled by a opnferencbi-of four dele- | ga,tes nominated by the,tmion and.four j clipsen by the employets, ano-an umpire; .' any disputes to ba settled by the umpire ' . . appointed. . 9. Only two classes1 of labour shall bo reoog- ■ ■ nised—viz., apprentices, and journeymen. 10. Apprentices' wages to be- -five shillings :■ (ss)-pei' week for the first year, and an?aa- .. ■. , vance of five shillings (6s) per week at tjie oi,each•.sufraequent year. •.■; jue proportion of apprentices td'.be'ona : , .. apprentice to every three' men or iractidn , "'' Of three; f6r the purpbse of 'determining I' ' 'the proportion" of; apprentices" to"-journey-men, the given number of men muse, have ■ been employed in any shop or factory for the previous six months, equal to twothirds full time.' This clause to be binding for-five years! The Chairman asked whether Messrs Brundell and Hayward, named first on the list, were present. Mr Chiflhohn: I appear for the Furniture Employers' Association, but,- as it- is not registered, it is necessary that I should give 1 the names of those employers who belong to ' th'o association. They are, as follow : — Brundell and Hayward. Mackenzie and Sanders, Scoullar and, Chisholm, Ellis and Smyth, F. A. Hooper and Co,, J. Parkar, V. Adamson, John Shaw, .John Gillies, i Alexander Watt, F. Muller, E. T. .Ward, A.. |C. Stewart, W. Noes, and J. J. Marlow. It ' will thus be seen that the association comprises all the large employer's in the trade, the total number of hands employed by them being about 105 to 115. I,am not in a position to stato how many';Of these belong to the union, but I have no doubt a majority of the men belonging to the union, are employed by employers in the association. _ Now I have been authorised by the association to ippear before the board simply.for tho purpose of stating that those employers who belong to tho association have decided to take .no part in the proceedings before the board

beyond explaining t.hnt their attitude doe 3 not imply any disrespect to the board. In order to satisfy the board of this I. propose , to state the reasons which have led the association to decide "not to take part. The first reason will appear fropi the correspondence which .has passed between the .union and the association, and, with the permission of the board,. I propose to read the correspondence. It, will be within the of. the board that in March last year the union lodged a reference in the court requiring' tho employers to appear before !:ie Conciliation Board; and after going into the matter fully the board made a recommendation which Mas embodied in an. industrial.agreement,, to .Tf>-.. . main in force for. one yeo.r, and which was signed by the union and employers. * Soon after the expiration of this agreement the union sent the following letter" to the'Furni: ture Employers' Association : — The secretary of Furniture Employers' Association.—Dear sir, —I am instructed by my •unioi; to write calling your attention to the fact that our industrial agreement ha 9 expired, and urging upon the members of your association the necessity of signing the new agreement. To facilitate this matter, my union has appointed a committee of six members to meet a similar committee from your association, should you .deem it necessary to arrange matters, or to hear. ,-any decision your association may come to. ~Trusting' you will place this matter before your ■ association.a.t an .early date aruVJaxour me with . a reply, as s.oon as possible.—A. Butterfield. .'. This-letter was referred to the committee of. .the.association, who passed the.following resolution:— .... . : ....... ■.... '." . . The committee unanimously resolved that as •the whole matter had been carefully considered' by the conference with the employees and submitted to the Conciliation Board 12 months ago,resulting in an agreement accepted by all parties,- and one that has been working satisfac- : torily during the past year, they do not think it .necessary,'seeing that "there is no improvement in trade, to alter said agreement. This resolution was' reported to a general meeting' of the association held on the 17tli March, when it was approved, and resolved that the secretary notify the union of the 'decision come to.' This was accordingly 'done, when the following reply was received from the union : — ■' -IC-4-9S. —The ■ secretary of Furniture Employers' Association.—Dear sir,—.l have been instructed by my union to inform you that wo regret that.tho Employers' .Association should deem it unnecessary to meet the delegates appointed by the union to discuss the log and minimum rate of wages submitted to the1 employers as a basis of a new agreement. Of.' course; you will perceive that.this action clearly causes a dispute,, which compels us to carry.the matter before the Board of Conciliation for adjustment; but to enable you to further consider your decision, and-let us try to adjust the matter to the'satisfaction of all parties, we again ask you to meet us in conference within a reasonable time —say, a fortnight from dateotherwise we must take'the necessary steps to ■ push the matter to a settlement.. Pending ne■gotiations. we trust there--.will .be no •.attempt made to .■.■■■ break: existing agreement.—YpurV re--.spectfully,- A.f'BuTTEpsiELp,..secretary. ■On" receipt lof-^this letter;, the, assocjatign ar- • ."'ranged-to; mqot -.the union .in,;ponforence,-,,This_ i meeting -was 'attended by delegate?" from the ■ ;u3iion in the proportion of abejut fbiir t>o o"ne, making it easy. to. outvote the employers' if; necessary. Almost every item in'the lo? submitted by the tmion was fully discussed, and the price's to be paid altered as agreed upon. A vote of thanks 'to theI..employers for the fair and conciliatory spirit in -. which they had met the union was proposed by the vicepresident and carried unanimously. At the ...special, request of the union delegates present at the meeting the employers drafted the log as agreed and amended by -conference, and ■ forwarded same to the secretary of the union with.-, the following letter :■— 19-5-98.—The secretary Furniture- Union.— . Dear sir,—ln submitting for your approval the .cabinetmakers and polishers' .log of prices, the ' Employers' Association desire'me to convey to you their appreciation of the conciliatory spirit manifest at" the conference with your, delegates to consider-the same. The Employers' .Asso- ■ ciatio'n have given much time.and consideration . to these-logs, and are. imanimously of opinion that the" price set opposite each article in the cabinetmakers and chairmakers' log will enable a good average tradesman to earn 9s perday; in other words, the prices are based on a * 9s per day rate, and show in nearly eyery case, an advance on the log in operation during the past year. The polishers' log, with a few exceptions, is the same as Ja.st year, which the', employers wish to adopt, confident that a good polisher will have little difficulty in- earning .■Bs per day.at the prices stated: The Associa- ; iion of Employers accept these logs ; as.fur-, " pishefl on'condition, that the, agreement -aa -to a. . '. minimum wage^i-eduction for, machinery, over-, '"time;"'BettlenTent-.df.'disputes,., ancl, employment. '■of apprentices remain .as.l^st, year, and that1 log" 'and agreement remain in.force for two yea^s. •Will yoti please add to third clause, which finishes' "airy disputes to be decided by ■ the;. •timpire ipjipih'ted" "and-'fh'e - decision," made ..-- known'to alt parties/^ Regret.ting,.,<lelay,-a,n<L r : trusting' fclm^your/imion wilLsee their.way to. fall-in' with ouiHproposals,—Yfyus truly,, b .A. ''jibopEH ~»;>.'{ •..--:;.!■,,;■■■;■-.,.• ;..-;.-: ..- ~. ■•'.;'•.-- ■ '' On ?tlie-r 16th, of "June thejasgooiation repeiyed '. 'the followingireply, ,W.hic.h,:.in the .absence ot. ■;tlie secretary. (M,r. Hooper), was,handed, to me-. 'by th,e .secretary- to ..the union; — .. ..." , ; \, tr- June 15, 189S;—The secretary Furniture^'Employers' Association.—Dear, sir,—ln reply tp/ your- communication, elated .May 19, I. am m-' structed by resolution carried at a meeting o* the United Furniture Trades Union held on the :-9tli inst. to inform you that after careful con- ■• siderationof the proposals submitted .by your association as a basis of an-industrial.agree-ment, this union regrets the action oi the em- , plovers in submitting alog of prices for cabinetmakers that is a.reduction,of pay as coniparecU with the logfixed.by the Board of Conciliation.; Our experience of 12.months' working'under ■ that log proves that the average cabinetmaker cannot earn the'minimum or Bs'per day,, not to mention tab minimum, workman. There.ore,we must decline to aefcept your proposals. Our union was advised-to. try .the,log for a year, when we might reasonably expect, an,advance on the rate of. pay if trade continued -to be 83 srosperous as.it was when we were before the board. We desire to state that, although trade continues to be prosperous, when we ask for an advance a reduction is offered.' An industrialagreement with the cabinetmakers'- and.chair■'mailers' logs marked exhibits A and B,.as amended, and minimum wago of ,9s per day, also the French polishers' log, luarkeclvexhibit 0 and minimum wage of 8s per day, that we ■ have resolved to adhere to, we submit for your signatures, and trust you will return same signed by your members on or before the 30ttt inst., as it will be necessary to procure the signatures of employers'(if any) who may not be members "of your association. Sincerely., trustingT&ncl6s"ed rprdposalß meet with the approval, of your iassociation.-^-A.'tBuMEHPIELD, ~ ~ ... IrV: reading over'the:;letter < with the- other enr: closures 'J-'savr-that* the; Jog and:.agreement, ., submitted bjf: the !'employ.orß...aß approved _t>y, the conference of'delegates had been, set aside' and ignored, and a new one substituted; and as the employers had indicated clearly that they would rigidly adhere to the decisions come to at the conference, I'did not consider it necessary to call a meeting of the associatop. On the 10th July I received from the secretary of the union the following letter: — To which I immediately replied: — July 9, 189S.—Mr E. Chisholm.—Dear sir,--Will you kindly furnish me with a reply to my communication to yoiir association dated June 15 before the 14th inst., as it is the intention of - the union to move in the matter if a reply is not forthcoming. Sincerely trusting as a reply you will return the agreement signed by the niom-ber3 ( ,of your association.—A. Buttekfield. I July 11th, 1898.—Mr. A. 3utterfield.-Dear, 1 s i r) _l ani thja morning in receipt of your fa- ; your.of the 9th inst., in which you ask me to i furnish you with a reply to your conimumcai tion dated June 15. The communication, as you are aware, was; addressed to our fleereUry (Mr Hooper), who was then, and :s still, absent, . fronrDunedin on a visit to Austraha^^As correspondence hitherto on .the matter referred to in you letter had passed through his hands, 1 was in the hope that he would have returned ■ betee now, in which case no doubt you would 1 have-received a reply. I have no t,. m the;absence of our secretary.considered it call a meeting of our association to consirter voih- letter, as most of the proposals it contains are an entire departure from the basis otagree--ri entcome to atPthe'conference with your union. It n'.u S t'be within the recollection of- your deleitowh'o attended, the conference asked for by yom- union that the log caprices submitted for . ynur approval .by tlie employers, which you refer tai fixed "by" the conference at which your un on in the proportion of about three or four to one and^ 1 fi tV vlJ l=h TI] t c h^ expressed themselves quite satiafied, thanjeing the employers for the fair and reasonable way th°v had met them. That being so, it is rather disingenuous of you'to refer to these prices as roposals submitted by our association and: certainly most difficult to understand the decision at which you say your union^ have nrrived—naniolv, that this union regret the action of the employers in Biibmitting a log of prices for cabinetmakers that is a reduction of pay as compared with the log fixed by the.Board of Conciliation.- Why do your union not censure your delegates for approving of and asking the employers to submit the log you refer to? But I emphatically deny your statement that the log submitted by the Employers' Association is a reduction on the log you refer to. It ib, on the contrary, a substantial advance on every item of any consequence to the worker, as a comparison of the two logs will show, and as the approval of your delegates evidenced. Your further statement that when you ask for an advance a reduction is offered, is just as wide' of the truth, arid calls for the strongest condemnation from the employers, who were disposed to mejt your union in any reasonable demand they might make. Does it not seem to your union very much like a farce to invite employers to a conference, thank them for the fair - way in which they have met you, and soon after, by letter, disregard every decision arrived at and

agreajnent- come ,io, and cruelly charge them with offering you a reduction when you ask an advance? The document accompanying your letter, and to which you refer as an indiistrial agreement for. our signature, is such a wonderful development from the simple agreement deposited in the Supreme' Court ,a,ncl bearing date March 1,. JS97 (which vyfis the 'agreement acv cepted at the conference), that it is to me and others quite unrecognisable.. The agreement as to niinintum wage, overtime, employment of apprentices, etc., was to remain as last year, instead of' which you now raise the minimum. wa°e Is per day, the overtime ■ being certain hour 3 from'lime''and'-a quarter to timeand.a half, and introduce a number of clauses that are . ■entirely-new—clauses that -were not even-men-tioned at the conlerence—most, if not all, of which, I.take leave.to think, ..will never be accep.tejj ijy any employer in the furniture trade, and certainly not by me.. Permit me, in conclusion, to state that your letters and documents, with my reply thereto, were laid before a meeting of our association held this afternoon. The. reply was approved, »nd it was unanimously resolved "to adhere to the logs and agreement submitted by the employers, and requested by: the conference, for the confirmation oE /your . union. Falling your- acceptance of these on or hefore the 21st inst., the employers consider themselves relieved'- from -any' agreement or understanding come to at sa.id conference, and free to aot .'as they deem, proper.—Yours respectfully,"!!. ChisholiJ."'. .'',". '. " '•"■'''. ''" r'. ■': It Will thus be seen from this correspondencethat" on the, expiration; of the agreement. em> • bodying the recommendation of the' board • made last year , delegates:- were; appointed. by the-union and" the association--to-meet and. confer and endeavour to arrive at an understanding; that the conference was carried s out ■ in a. spirit of conciliation and an understanding arrived at, and, the1 delegates representing the union;thanked-the employers,for meeting them in so fair and conciliatory a spirit. The xinderstanding arrived at meant a considerable improvement in the' log prices, and the employers naturally expected that the union \ would confirm the arrangement. Instead, however, of doipg this, the union not only •■ made further demands, involving a rise of the minimum wage from 8s to 9s per day, and' increos.es in log prices varying from 10 to 40 per cent., but misrepresented the position by making it appear, that the log, instead of being a log agreed to by their own delegates, waa siniply a log proposed by the employers. In these' circumstances, then, the association has'come to the conclusion that the . union does not wish.conciliation, and the members, of the' assPciation consider that they have been fooled by the union, and they are'deteTtnined not to be. fooled a second time, if they can help it. ' This, then, is. the. first reason -why. the1, association refrajn from taking part in, t th'e proceedings. The second is that thsre is no dispute whatever between J any of the-emplgyers apd their men, The-^ men express themselves perfectly satisfied. I At a full .meetiiig-of the Employers' Association every member bore testimony t° the fact: that so far from there'being any dispute not a single complaint' had been: heard ;. on the, contrary, the utmost satisfaction seemed, tp ,; prevail/- The third is that the memberp,..of the-association are convinced that i<he.union would not-be..Batisfied,.w!th any'recpmrneiidation of the.board which did nptgiVe unibnists •the preferential right of employment. '-Airid-'i the employers are determined to resent "this ■■ demand until compelled to yield by ■ a higher oourt, and the members of the association understand that the Conciliation Board considers itself-bciund by precedence on the point. This de.ihand i by the union' was not in the;recommendation of the board last year, was: not e'venVmentioned at-the conference of delegates ;on the contrary,, it was arranged that. the clauses in the agreement 'should be .the •same..as last year, and^the employers consider it manifestly-unfair that the union should totally disregard the action of their own delegates at a, eppfereruje Held at their own re-' -quest, arid attempt t to ;coerce employers into accepting, an agreement," the clauses of which : were" rievei'" submitted, when they have a favourable opportunity. As one of the largest, employers ■of labour in the fiirnitxire trade!,... we have at the present time over 40 employees, 10 only belonging tp the,union, and it -'S,' mainly; in;.consequence, Pf, the favour with\ which I.personally ha\'e heretofore regarded' the union that any of them belong to it; and' I shpuld like ; to know where the equity or' justice ,to.,the three-fourths of pur employees woutd come in; were'we compelled to give a... preference to unionists in our employ. Aii----. conclusion, Mr'Ohairman, permit me to say j that the best evidence' of our confidence ,in :; your board, and'bur respect for the recom-, menda'tioris you embodied .in an industrial agreement when, we were, before your board a little, more than 12 months... ago,., is the. fact-that although- that agreement expired, in March of this yeai* the employers •• have largely, adhered to th?it'"agreemei)t, up to the pre|eht,! and I venture' to think 'will con- v tinue toirespect ihat"agreement, instead ;of taking advantage of the position to reduce-, either wages or.log prices, ''. ,j ; .'.- ". ■-■ \ / The Chairman:;;!l understand you do hot . iwish to take any parj; xn the proceedings? j :. Mi; Ohisholm • That is so.';' L ''^;>:v • * -.. . The, Chairman: Arid you,'Mr Marlow, arid] you'i Mr Hooper? ! ■". -. ,': •'-.'"' .. N ' The employisrs.riamed'replied'similarly.■'■..-•■ The': Chairman' asked:.vphether ,any - of,. the . other..employers -w^re,^^present, and no reply. ;",was mrJde. '_ ; !'£■:':,..' '■',■.*''■", ,'-!,'',/'■■ ■Mr Chisholm J?aid some'of" the'names of 'thoseapnearing ir> the order of reference were "out ■of ; Dunadini Hfe'-might further explain that'Cthose who were not members of. the Em-■, ployera': Association, wjth the exception, of Mr.>;Lorie, employed very few men indeed. ;Mojt of, them prp"bably. only employed them-' selves and an apprentice,. or' themselves and another.' . ..,../. ,\ .. '. ." . .Mr Hood said, with" regard to that,.Mr. Ohisholn\ would* see tha necessity of having r.he names of all who were employers of labour, or who were in r. position to employ la.bour, embodied in the order of reference. ..There mustvbp some understanding with regard to tha 'matter, if only to protect the larger employers. .. ' ... '.. Mr Marlo>y r said that was one reason why the-Employers' Asaoeiafcipn did not. wish, to inish the matter, before the Conciliation Board,- ■ They wished >to get, everyone compelled, to come under-^he^ agreement. • The ■ Chairman said that he had a letter ■. from Mr A." Loi'ie, which he would read. In 'the.course of this letter Mr Lorie stated; that with some Blight modifications iii clauses, 1 and 6,' of the ■ conditions of employmeht he was quite satisfied' Vith the proposals of the : i:nion, provided thajVtltey were made binding for not-less than three year 3. .Clauses 2, 3, 4,-5, 7, 8. 9,. and 10 he accepted m their entirety. Clauses 1 and. 6 were, in his opinion, unreasonable, and he would not agree to them- until they -were,-Miodified or he was compelled; to. As to unibnists having the preference; of, ,emplpyment, Ij.e', acrreed to . that, with slight modifications,' 'jine'e he' thought it only reasojia;ble, that unionists .should be the -first: to enjoy the; improved cpnditibfis of labour which Svere due to their, uuitv." He, how-; ever, wished it' to; be distinctly understood that; whilst' he thoroughly upheld unionism,, ' he- would not sign, any • agreement which ;allov.'ed the ifnion jp be a close corporation, or which'^debarred hfnii from giving casual employmehK'to. necessitous workers who miffht not be able, to join the union permanently. Provided,, however,; .that the union would, without entrance fee of delay, accept all1 applicants for membership, and would make special- provision ..for those who were only working temporarily at the trade by allowing them to become temporary members of thfe union while they were working at the trade, he would in the future, as in the past, always give the preference to unionists, Mr Hood said he was somewhat disappointed at the attitude, taken up by the employers in this case. Mr Chisholm. as the representative of the' association, hnd laid tre matter very ably before the board,. and as itapneared from his statement it was a very one-sided'affair- He (Mr.Hood), however, thought that Mr Chisholm's statement required a little modification to put the matter in its proper light. He would endeavour, as btrefly as possible,' to do that. As the board were, aware, iv similar dispute came before them in March of last year, when the union submitted a log of prices and a minimum wage of 9s a day as the basis of the dispute. The log was submitted to the employe^ ana the board, after two days' Bitting_ and careful consideration of all the items in the.log. finally gave a deoision that was somewhat adverse to the union, inasmuch as it reduced the stahdard;,of the furniture trade.prices to probably . the lowest soalb that, had ever been submitted to any Coriciliatiph" Board or Axbitrationi dburt. That 'was somewhat :of: a ":take-.back". at the timeV but the anost skilled workmen in- the trade,: who., were qualified to "earn 9e,;105, or even 11s a day, accepted the promise then given by the representatives'of the employers that, if the omnloyees agreed to the decision of the board, then, probably, within 12 months' time, they could come before the board with confident" and ask for Is a.day more, and also to h.a^ the original log reinstated in its entirety, ami the employers would not hesitate to grant it. Several of the employers signed the log fiu»mitted to the board last year, and agreed to 9s a day as the minimum wage in the tracio before the dispute came before the board. Now the employers were saying that tho Qs a day basis was an Unfair one —oiib that thoy could hot, or would .not, pay. But they had siyen no reasons fot the stand they took.up. They simply said that they would not pay triy 9s, although they agreed to pay it 12 months ago. Now the condition of trade wa3 better to-day than it was 12 months ago. At no time, indeed, in the history of" the colony, was the furniture trade in- a more successful condition than it was to-day. He, therefore, felt satisfied that tha Employers could not say. that they were not in a position to pay 9s a day. At any rate ho.considered that the Union were entitled to ask the employers to redeem the, uromise they had given. The union found that there were some anomalies in the log that might bo done away with, to the adyantoco of both employers aild em-

ployeea.. They accordingly appointed "a comi . mitt'ee to draw up a. log on the lowest possible scale. That log was submitted to. the . employers, and Mr Olnsholm had gone through .the correspondence in full. That correspondence was -substantially correct. Their union approached the employers, in the first instance, and submitted a log. They went to the employers to have the log and f agreement signed. The uuion delegates waited cm three employers in the course of the day. . One was away from home, and another was not to be seen, while the third informed the delegates that the employers intended to hold a meeting and that it was no use of their going further in the matter, as there was no possibility of their getting that agreement' signed. The union afterwards got a reply stating that the employers' would not agree to that log. Then an effort was made to ar--range matters, and the employers said they ■ would sign the whole agreement on the 8s a day basis, and the lo^-the union were working under. The union could not see why the whole agreement could not be accepted;" They thought they should have some understanding: With the employers, and they asked for a conference.^ That conference was granted. They . met in conference, arid then the whole trouble , arose. It was distinctly stated by the cm- ' plovers that the delegates > from j the'union ' wept" to the' conference and agreed upon: a certain lajr. Now. he- (Mr Hood) wished, to, ' state that it was distinctly stated bpth by the! ■■ chairman (Mr Chishplm) and by 'him (Mr ..; -:Hood). on behalf of he union, that they;were1 " ..not there to agree to anything. They had .jnet simply to hear any suggestions that might be made, i.nd to lay the "matter before their;. : ... ; respective' association's. ' ~; ■ I The Chairman:■: You agreed to recommend [a, lOg? ~.V.- -.:' / "■; ; . - .;>- . . •Mr Hood said they, did no^ agree to any-. ,: (thing. " They pimply, jsaid; that, they would | submit the recommendations of the confer?' j ence to their union. ' They, however, found i that the recommendations were based on a . v i nyuch lower scale than theexisting log. ..The, : [difference between the employers' log and the. 'existing one'showed a total reduction on. the • • ,i existing log pricfes of £I', 15s 7d. ■ The state-,:' V ment that •- there■■; was m o reduction in. theJog.was not, strictly, true.. He had a list o£ : reductions that the ? union had extracted from, , the log submitted by the employers,' and he ' held that.it was substantially correct. He,., (Mr Hood) iii' coming there that morning,-; understood that the princip.al v pbjection to the * union's.conditions of employment was toi >he ' minimum -wage. He had expected to hear some reasons advanced by the employers as to why they should pot pay a. minimum wage. He did not know if 9s a day was any too • much for a mechanic to for,, and it was ■ •a very low subsistence; wage for si .man with ' a family; The board would observe that one «- branch of the trade was satisfied to remain. , on the Bs. a day basis. That was, French ~. j polishers. The'reason for, that was that the* ■ other three branches of the trade required .'± •more skill than the French polishing, and, in addition to that, they had to provide-them-'. selves with expensive tools.' Therefore, . thoy had decided that the Frenoh polishers should ''■''■' remain oh a;n 8b a day'.bksie... Employers had '■. "urged nothing against a 9s a, day-basis, For, • :the present log it would require ;a; very good. , ,man indeed to earn even 8s a, day on the log <' submittedijby the employers. , There was no -, .hardship in,having 9s, or even I'Os, a day as " .the minimum :wage,"as, tlie employers always .;. ; had the alternative of allowing the men' to» ; " fal| back on the log. With regard .to the.' ,questioh: of overtime, ;the union wished to''-'. discourage overtime ras much as poasibje. -They found in some conditions of the trada men wajking about doing nothing,- while some shops were .working overtime continually. The men did ,not want, overtime. It 'was not good for their health, ahd'ii; was not good for them in any sense of the word. But A they asked-that, if the men were compelled ' Jto work overtime, it'was only fair that they.-: ..should be paid at the rate asked for.'.(With-'. 'regard to clause 4, the clause was sup<?ested ■ ' bythe employers at the conference, anS the -1 : lihion put it in the conditions of employment v at their suggestion. It was found that some1 ; employers were in the" habit of- starting• a ,' . man on. a job, and the man would be1 finished. \ before he knew that he was working by the '■' .•day.or on piecework, and'the Union thought; ',- it was only right that there' should he: tv ' definite understanding 6n this point, Clause! \ ,sWasalso 'approved at the conference. /\VHh ■ * .regard to unionists having a preference of employment, the union asked that that should ~, t bo put into-the conditions of.;employment, \.\ ■because unless r there was such a claujse \'. jas that,,the. existence of the. union woulct " •be imperilled.. He was, not. going to;"* make any particular charges against ;' anyone, .but. .they ; found . that the whole'- : tendency was to discourage a man .or meri'. ■:■ from being unibnists. Men oojald not be got; • to remain unionists': so* steadfastly -as. they^) could if such .a.clause'"•.were- inserted; in the ~ agreement*j;lt was< the'intention,of;4Ke act,.';. ' that the tnen should b^pnionistsi'.. It was disp-J •tinctly stated:by'theact that ifiJ intention was ' to encourage, the formation of ■ industrial"1'._ j unions and associations and to facilitate the' ■' . EetileSineiit of industrial disputes.; 'IfJthe pur-' i pqse^b'f^tMW-'ict/Wasifb encou'tage the: for,ma-».r;i j tion" of "industrial unions'.and: atssociationsj'rhe•would naturally .expect-.tliat,. the taard would, in some way ,by its decision assist, unionists; ■ to iorward that' ' object..,', ;He therefore" ' thought- th%i ilie jiriipri .w^s justified"in asking'?. ! for. preferential employment, for"'unionists..::;Wife jjegard. to clause 7 of. the conditions of I;' employmeht, lie would -ask-to have that, £. amended to read: • "Cabinetmakers em-* ployed on chair work to be paid the minimum, ', '' ware." - - /■'■ .. • : .-. ■-. ■ • '•.■.-.- ■ -■ .'■; Mr Ohisholm.said.tlie clause with-reference; ■to unionists was never referred to at the coii-r. .C ference. So far from the Temployera inter-, esting themselves in the question as to.' whether the A'en were unionists or nonunibnißts, at a full meeting of employers he\ asked the' question -if ;they knew whetheri ' their men were unionists or non-iinionists,, •' and with4 the- exception of himself none of, them knew what the men were.* \' :. •/.';';• ' Mr Hood proceeded to say that, cabipeti,makers were accustomed to make a certainclass of work, and to set them to ,mak? chairs on the chairmakers' log price .would not be fair. Witli regard to olause 8, that was i""" the" last industrial agreement, and • worked satisfactorily. . . .; > The Chairman: Was that discussed at the conference? . . Mr Chisholm: The employers took no exception to any clause that'was inserted iii the industrial agreement,. • '•'■. Mr Hood said as regards clause 9—that; only two; clauses .of labour should be recog-nised—-viz., apprentices and journeymen—..; tliat was necessary, asnon-unionists were prepared to work as improvers and undersell, their labour. Clause 10, he thought, was') practically the game as a olause in the last industrial "agreement. It was suggested that ■the clause should be bindingl for five years. . The Chairman did not see how it could hoi made binding far five years, as the award of .■ the Arbitration Cpurt'was only "for three . years. '. ;.'.'...■■ .-' ■ • ':"•'..;." ;, , -. ' Mr Hood'said'there; nusht beusome legal difficulty .about the matter, but;, the union,'' would like to liave the clause: binding for, the term he had mentioned if it could be managed. As regards the .prices offered no\y lay the employers, the reductions .were extensive on the whole of the present industrial agreement. -.--..'■ . : • ■ The Chairman: You seem to have come) away well satisfied from the conference. Mr Hood said he came away from the con> ferenoe perfectly satisfied that the employers would accept the original log that came before the board. The- union would be per-' fectly delighted to get that. But now the employees would not accept the lower log. Mr "Millar said there was not muoh dift ference between the twq parties. If they had I a talk over matters they would perhaps save the board from.coming to a decision. Mr Ohisholm stated that the employers had ' always shown a strong sympathy for the unionists. At a meeting at the Coffee Palace on Friday the union was referred to in the most friendly terms. The employers had no desire whatever to take up a position antagonistic to the-union. In fact, it'was the very opposite. . - After a short discussion, in which Mr Hood " mentioned that the reductions, as compared with the original log, amounted to 10 per cent, for machine work, 8 per cent, on all the prices in the log, and Is per day reduc- . tions, Tha Chairman said that the board proposed .to adjourn till Friday morning, and suggested that the . parties should in the : meantime have a- conference. He was authorised by the board to'say. that they reebmmonded the parities to settle the.dispute on the lines stated to the conference. Mr Chisholm 'said he thought his party would meet'the ;men in conference. . Mr Hood: The union have passed a resolution that they will not accept 8s a dayMr Marlow: And the employers will not accept anything else. The board then adjourned till Friday morni>;c at 10 o'clock.

j DRY, THIN, AND FALLING HAIR is dv». I in the majority of cases, to imperfect action ' lof the sebaceous, or oil glands. Deprived of ! its proper nourishment, the hair becomes harsh ! and brittle, the. scalp dry and scaly,. and the ! roots choked and lifeless in a hard, dry skin. 'The purest, sweetest, and nipat effective treatment is a warm shampoo with Cuticura. Soap, followed by light drpsßings with Cuticura, purest of emollient akin cures, whioh will > produce a clear, wholesome ■ scalp and luxu- ; riant, histTOU3 hair, when every other known ■ method fails.—lo ; —The cruiser Oomus, which has just returned to England after a twb and n-half. years' commission, hns travellod altogether 63.000 miles during that ...time —16,000 under sail and 47,000 under steam. She haa consumed £15,000. worth of coal—73oo tons. Melun's Food for Infanta and Invalids. Perfectly adaptad for the youngest infant. Keeps good in all climates; free from anisnal gornis. To be obtained from all druggists au4 ..stores,