CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15825, 25 July 1913, Page 2

CONCILIATION COUNCIL.

GENERAL LABOURERS AND LOCAL BODIES. DISPUTE REFERRED TO THE COURT. Mr J. 11, Trigjjs, Conciliation Commissioner, sal ycsteruiiy morning to hear the dispute between the Otajro Ueiiera) Labourers' Union and the public bot!:es iuid contractors cited—totalling 195 in all, The employers were represented on the council by Messrs R. Crawford, Jl. Stevenson, and Theodore Arnold, and the men's representatives, were Messrs A. Montgomery, W. 11. Perry, and A. M'Neil. Air "J. E. MacManus was also present as the a-2ont of tJie union.

At the commencement of ihe proceedings the Commissioner said that the contractors had withdrawn from the dispute and would be joined on the morrow with the Builders and Contractors' dispute. There being no objection to this the names of the contractors were struck out.

A letter was received from the Waikouati County Council, applying for exemption, but both parties objected, and the application was not allowed.

Representatives were also present from the Taieri County Council, the Dunedin Drainage Board, and the Port Chalmers and Green Island Borough Councils—all with the object of securing- exemption or partial exemption. Mr A. Slinger claimed exemption for the Drainage Board. The board was prepared to pay the minimum wage of 9s, but the old award suited quite well. On ihe other hand he did not see how the board could carry on undea- some of the conditions imposed in the demands brought forward. ■ Mr MacManus said that 'rhe question of exemptions was the gravest one that could come before any Conciliation Council, because 011 it really hinged the question ot whether disputes were to be <.et;!ed constitutionally or otherwise. There-were solid reasons why no exemptions should be granted, if exemptions were granted to any public body, or any section of workers were to be exempted and classed as permanent hands, all sorts of unfairness would arise. Take, for example, the matter of wet places. The permanent hands would be fOrccd to work in wet placcs without the relief granted to those who were under the award. To grant exemptions would be to cause confusion and dissatisfaction. It meant undermining the provisions of the award—it meant whittling dow.n the award end leaving men defenceless. The result would be the dislocation of the industry and the harassing of men at every turn. He warned t-ho council that there were men in labour ranks who wanted that sort of thing to come about—they, in fact, wanted to give the employers rope enough to hang themselves, and if they got their way there was going to be trouble. The present application was made in the hone of getting an award that would keep the men under arbitration. The applicants wanted every question settled on its merits, and -if such a. system were agreed upon the employers would find that they "were dealing with reasonable men, who wa.nted arbitration, and did not want to hand everything over to the " Red Feds."

In applying for exemption on behalf of the Taieri County Council, Mr B. B. Couston said that tho conditions proposed would bo absolutely unworkable in country districts. The conditions had been drafted solely for men working about and liviag in the town; whereas, in the country tho conditions were iotallly different. He had 20 men on the Taieri who had to look after a 1000 miles of roadways. Those men had monthly engagements, and some of them had been with the council for years. As for ''wet places" a great- part of the Taieri County would be a " wet place" as defined by the suggested award, and if they interpreted the clause strictly the greater part of Dunedin would be a "wet place." In reply to Mr Montgomery, Mr Slinger said that one of his reasons for wishing exemption for the board was tho fact that the men working in wet places often had to co-operate with other men who wero in dry places, and how could they have one man working six hours and another working eight hours? Further, the rates of pay were exceedingly high, and the erection of shelter sheds and sanitary conveniences, and the provision of hot water at each job would mean hundreds of pounds to the board.

Mr Perry pointed out that a cheap framework and tarpaulin shelter shed oould easily be run up, and that the blacksmith or other man on the job could have tho water boiling when required without any inconvenience.

Mr Slinger said he was quite prepared to rccommend the board to givo them that much. In fact, they always tried to give tho men those things. Tho Commissioner pointed out that _it was only wasting time to discuss details. Ho would not take the responsibility of exempting anyone at present. They must apply to the court- to be struck out. The Coinmifsioner continuing, said he had a copy of the Christchurch award, and ho thought, it could bo made to apply hero. Under that award provision was made for giving men who were out of employment relief work at a reduced wage. Mr MacManus objected strongly to any such proposal. It was hard for tho working man "to live on his wages, tut it would be harder still for a man in reduced circumstances to live on a reduced wage. He oould quite 'understand such a clauso emanating from tho people in Canterbury. Many of them were of the revolutionary order, and wished to undermine the Arbitration Act, bring ridicule on it. They had no intention of accepting such a provision in Dunedin. Consideration was then given to the first clauso of the union's demands, which asked in effect for a 44- hour week—eight hours a day on five days of the week, and four hours on Saturday,—but six hours to constitute a day's work in a wet place. " Wet place" was defined as a place wliero a worker lias to stand in not lees than two inches of water, slurry, or silt, or where water other than rain is dripping on him. The employers' counter-proposals asked for a week of 48 hours, with 8' hours a day. Mr M'Neil objected to the 81 hours. Tho labourers should have a 44 hour week. The Commissioner suggested the adoption of the Canterbury award, which gave 44 hours. Mr Stevenson demurred, saying that everything depended on the carters, who had 48 hours. Mr MacManus said that 48 hours for the carters included time spent going to and from work. He would like to see Mr Crawford's and Mr Stevenson's authority for representing the local bodies. The Commissioner: I appointed them. Mr Arnold said ho quito oonsidered it to bo the duty of every local body to be fair to its employees.—(" Hear, hear.") He had been struck with tho amount of care and thought evident in the drafting of the Christchurch award. Although they were striving for 48 hours he thought they might give way to the men and concede 44 hours, provided these words were added to (lie clause—" Except in cajes of emergency' when delivery of metal might be necessary." That would apply to Saturday afternoons only and not make the men start before 8 a.m. The Commissioner: That is a very wiso and reasonable suggestion. Mr Montgomery said that the contractors could afford to pay a man overtime in such a case. . Mr MacManus said that tho men had 'previously allowed themselves to be drawn into little things like that, but t-lio spirit of them had not been 'acted up to. They could not admit the addition without being granted overtime. Mr Stevenson intimated his inability to accept other than 48 hours a week. Mr Couston suid the County Councilscould not work under a 44-hour week. Be suggested that as long as counties paid the rate of wages provided by the award they should bo exempt from tho other terms of the award. Unless they did that he would be obliged to object to every clause as it came along. Mr MacManus said that somo years aso he had met Mr Couston at tho Conciliation Council and lie had stated then that his men were working 44 hours. Mr Couston: i'ou are misrepresenting me. My men could not ivork under a 44hour agreement. Mr M'Neil said that if a surfaceman wen; working, say, at a culvert two hours,' journev from his home lie would have two hours' extra to do before 110 started at 8 a.m. and after he finished at 5 p.m. "Mr Couston," ho said, "would soon have his men back in Colorado picking cotton iur 24 hours a day." Tho Commissioner said that he had been thinking about the local bodice, and seeing that it was the public money that was bciii" spent lie thought the host riling would be for the court to make the award in their case. Then no individuals could be blamed for it. He had no wish to shirk ins duties. Mr Arnold had made 11 reasonable proposition, but some of (lie ritepayers might turn round and object lo it. Mr MacManus had objected lo the Cantorbury proposal in regard to wok. "I say this," continued Mr Iriggs, ''that half a" loaf is better than no bread in Imd times. If I were a working man T voukl far sooner work for 6.1 per day than see my wife and family starving,"

Mr Macilanus: VVc would eoon be working for bi a day altogether. -wu- Kovcnsoi. that as a deadlock had been reacnod tlicy should go on U) tile 'next Clause. Mi- Ai-jioiJ : 1 presume my proposal is icJOcUli. me Commis-iioner: Evidently. 'ine second c.auac governing ihe lute of wages was men oonsiuercd. ■juiu men asked 16 Ixl lor tunnel men, timotr men, cuulkers, laoouri-its pitrcmg bars m trencnts, hummer and drill men, and nun using explosives, 2s lor labourers employed in wet placcs, and Is Ajd [Or otnt/r labourers. The employers' proposal was Is 3d for tunnel men, timber men, oaulkere, and men using explosives, Is ljd for other labourers. Mr S. Boreham (representing the licensed drainers) aekod ttiut the words "caulkc-rs" and " scwer-work" should be exciscd. A caulker must be a licensed drainer. Mr MacManus said a man might do caulking_ aDd not necessarily be a licensed drainer." Continuing, lie said that the Petone agreement provided for a minimum of Is 3d all round, and tlio Auckland agreement for Is 2d. They could not accept the terms of the Christchurch agreement. ; Mr Arnold said they were only fixing the minimum 'for publio bodies, and public opinion would always govern the maximum. The Labourers' Union had already agreed to Is l|d in other departments of work, and now they were asking for more. Mr Montgomery said the minimum was always the maximum in Dunedin except in isolated eases. If they would grant the Is 3d now as the minimum the men would agre6 to almost anything else. .Mr Triggs said the employers were prepared to give Is 3d an hour to tunnel men and timber men, Is 3d to men working with explosives, and Is l|d per hour to all others. The Commissioner asked whether they would be prepared to accept the terms of the Christchurch award with the deletion of the c'<vti6c dealing with relief work. The men objected to that clause. Mr Arnold again favoured the inclusion of this clause. Mr M'Neil said it had been stated aoross the tablo that some of the local bodies were paying more than the award rates. He could show cases of men in the Harbour Board who averaged £2 4s 9d per week, or 7s 6d per day of 8< hours. . Mr MacManus: To save discussion I might state that we cannot accept Is ljd. It can go to the court. Mr Steveneion said that seeing that there were a number of local bodies concerned (he employers had made up thoir minds not to concede anything more than they had offered—4B hours a week with the Christchurch rate of wages, Is 3d for tunnel men and Is Hd for all others. ,

Mr MacManus replied that the men were 60 satisfied that they could produce argumonk» before the court for an improvement that they would have no hesitation in bringing the case to the court.

The Commissioner said that ho was sure that if the union and the employers oould see their way cloar to. accept the Christchurch awanj in toto it would give saticfaction to both parties. There being no practical response to this, Mr Arnold said that on behalf of the local bodies, a-nd particularly tho Drainage Board, ho' wished to move a very hearty vote of thanks to the commissioner for presiding. Let them pass' that vote and allow the whole matter to go to tho court. He felt sure that they had done all toy oould on behalf of the local authorities and in the beat interests of the men themselves. Mr MacManus sooonded tho vote of tlmnlns, and pointed out that the employers had disagreed with the Christchurdh proposals so far as the tours were concerned. They had so many wet days hero that a man must eifiher go on working in the wet or stop work r.nd lose his pay. At some jobs a mail could not work in the rain or he would get a chill and die. He knew ono case where a man doing pick and shovel work on the tramways was forced to go on working in t'he rain, or ho would not have been n.blo to feed his family. He .worked on, -with tho result that he caught a chill and died. If they took the average earnings of some of their working men and divided them between his wife and family

they would find that they got' less than oven a criminal received. The workers foilthat, with all the advances of civilisation, the

men wlho were doing the most useful work in society should get more wage 6. They .would havo no hesitation in submitting their oaso to a.n independent tribunal for consideration. They only regretted that they had not mot the men on the public bodies. When they wero faced with the contractors instead they remembered the Marlows whb were going to give them 9s 6d a dav and they remembered tho Walkers who" were going to make tho awards retrospective. Where were they now? They were sheltering behind the contractors who had come to meet, them that dav. Mr Stevenson said that to hear Mr MacMnnus's remarks ono would think that tho representatives of tho public bodies wero a most inhumane lot of men. If they went over each representative on the local bodies they would find as decent a lot of men as anyone oould wish to meet, and all anxious to help the working man. What t.ho' employers had offered them that day was quito fair, and he did not credit very much what Mr MaoManus had said about the amount of his earnings. He could show them that the average earnings of the 20 odd navvies employed by ihim during tho past year had been not less than £2 10s a week. It was the minimum wage they imd come to strike to-day, and not the maximum Mr M'Neil said 4 Irs arguments still held good. Ho maintained that, the extra threequarters of on hour per day was nothing but a loafing business thrown in to the men. He knew tihat from experience. If the employers could throw in that three-quarters of an hour per day with 9s 9d as the minimum and 44 hours a week that would meet all requirements. Mr Montgomery said they were prepared to agree to the hours, but Mr Arnold had

introduoed a proviso that they could not aooopt. Ho endorsed what Mr MacManus had eaid. The men in publio life to-day had got in on their suffrages and on promises of a square deal, but they took good care not to bo present to-day. In answi'r to the commissioner. Mr Montgomery said.that his union would accept the Christ-church award if the minimum wage were ra'sed to Is 3d per hour or, 6uy, Is ljd. Mr Perrv said it was premature on Mr Arnold's part ta t.r.v to terminate the discussion. Now that tlicy were there let them try to come to a decision. The Commissioner said that the last award had given the men Is per hour, and at the present timo the employers were giving Is ljd per hour and better conditions. If tlicy induced the proprietors to give them more than Is lid he would say that they were not fit men to represent the public bodies. That waiS the minimum rate granted by any court in New Zealand.

Mr Perry said ho did not agree with Mr M'Neil's remarks about the extra threequarters of an hour. They constituted a stigma on the gangers. In all his experience if he had not been there at a quarter to eight to start on the whistle, he simply did not get paid. The eight hours showed that they did really work that extra time. Mr R. Thomson (Otago Harbour Board) said that the had never been cited under any award, but it had always fallen into line, and when taking on men had given preference to unionists. The men now employed by the Board who wero not unionists were very old servants of the board. Thev did not wish to join the union, and they were not forced to do so. Mr MacManus 6aid that he had made an application before Mr Justice Sim to have the Harbour Board made a party to the award, and the application had been granted. The secretary of the Board would be aware of that fact. That it was a fact would be seen when ho stated that there had been several breaches of the award by the board, and the Inspector of Factories had had to (jo down there to remedy them. Mr Arnold suggested that the representatives of the union should take the Christchurch award and confer among themselves to see if they would adopt its terms minus the recommendation with regard to hours and wages, leaving those two points to be settled by the Court. Mr MacManus: Wo are ready to accept the hours now

Mr Thomson at this stage applied for exemption for the Harbour Board, but the Commissioner said that lie must apply to the Court. The representatives of the union then retired from the room and conferred in private for somo minutes. On returning Mr MacManus announced that they wore prepared to accept the clauecs of the Christchurch award, governing- overtime, holidays, wet places and dirty places, and suburban work. / Mr Arnold said the employers wished to make an addition with regard to wet places, the effect of which would bo to exclude the Otago Harbour Board and the Drainage Board from the operation of those clauses. Those bodies, he said, employed men who were constantly working in "wet places" as interpreted by the clause. The Drainage Board had works in_ progress now for a certain amount, and if that clause wero to come into force it would dislocate the board's finances. Mr MacManus said that his sido could not agree to that.' If the caeo worn to go before the Court tho evidence which the union could bring in regard to the effects of work in wet places would bo an eye-opener to most people. Mr Crawford said that there was no chancc of'their agreeing, and the best thing they could do was to let the whole matter go to the Court. Mr Stevenson concurred in this opinion. Tho Commissioner said "he really thought it was the beet course to adopt. He would not 6av that but for tho fact that there were, public bodies concerned. If th« union would accept 48 hours and Is Ud an hour an agreement could bo got at, but if they said they would not do that it was no use wastins any more time. Mr M'Neil: We cannot accept 48 hours. The sitting closed a few minutes later with a voto of thanks to Mr Triggß.