Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ARBITRATION COURT.

SITTING IN DUNEDIN. The members <rf the Arbitration Courtufitic© Stringier (presidonti V> - S ™ >t \ and Mr J. A. M'Cullourii— commenccd the sittings hero at 10 o'clock yesterday momtig. FELT HATTERS. • In this dispute no recommendation was rame to bokno the ConciL'ation Ooinmis-

Mr Cookson, far the employers, said that two or throe of his witnesses were laid aside with influenza, and would not bo able to attend for same days. Mr Haymes, for the union, asked the employee to state their oase. They hadchSlongetl the bona fides of the umon but ssar<£ss & prSded ,bßfor ° ** <Ks P" to

Mr Oookson said that the 'employers' meat m reply to fto out the objections, generally speaking Ho prepared to go into the The President said that if tho employers' contentions took the union bv stn^rHvl £ entitied £ s n r s n ° m s to look into them. It would be better to give nofe.ee of what the union had temLt Mr Coofcon said one objection the union was not a bona lide one, in that they had not the required number of journeymen to constitute a uiuoiT ground was that the 'umon had opposed any attempt on the paxt tho to mcrease their bus Less during the period when there was no competition from outsido oountriea. They had opposed tho introduction of unskilled labour taow £ J Sk I » "«• «« I

■ INCREASES IN WAR BONUS.' Tho carpenters and joiners (Mr appliedl for an increW wax bonus ' Mr Cookson said the employers' had m objection, seeing that the coSxt hi aireadv \ vaj \'J onu3 tho north. I-ha President: You are willing- that thnv should be put on the same footing as the carpenters in tho north' S IdVw"" Yei " » » "">»* "f bo T S«S~ id,a " : ** "»• » *-m rStyZT"' m >*° «•»■»*» « JS®, ®^ i ? eer3 ' rangemakers, oopperwriied lot metal , woc] «irs Elston) T?i t jncreasod war bonus. Mr Elston said that there were three odfcettcr mSL ? PreSldent: 13 contention, J. A. Brown (for the employers) : m<Sng COlrrt th 6 hoarin * «« this t >r f sm ? uldcrs ' application n set down for hearing on Wednesday.

interpretation. Th° Engineers' Union's alppiication for for WaS faed APPLICATION TO AMEND The Bakers and Pastrycooks' Union an- ° lts <ward amended, Mr Cookson said that the application affected country employers. None of the country bakers was present to object, and tho master bakers had no objection to the mcreaeo being given to country workers mm Sam Vvf « be ° n sven5 ven to town man -, When tho award was made the country bakers were overlooked, and no increase was granted to them. Mr Haymes said tho union wanted the award brought mto lino with tho Canterbury award.

The court made the amendment, the President remarking that it would bring them same footing here as in Canter-

; TAILORESSES' UNION. Mr Cookson said a complete recommendation had been come to before the Conciliation Council. There wa3 an objection however, by the Invercargill employers to the alteration m the provision regarding the proportion of apprentices. Perhaps the court would hear the objection at the invercargill sitting before making an award iho Invercargill employers desired the samfa proportion as in the previous awardnamely, one apprentice to two journeymen It was now one to three. Miss Runciman suggested that she should see tho Dunedin assessors and endeavour to come to an agreement without having tho case .heard m Invercargill. The President said ho thought this would be tho best course to adopt. It was not a yei7 important matter. It would be a pity if they could not agree on the point after agreoing to everything else. IVCss Runciman said she thought Invercargill should be placed on the same footing as Dunedin. Invercargill was a Lugo centre, and there was a certain amount of competition with Dunedin by tho tailors there.

The President said if bo agreement could be oome to the court would hear what was to be said about the position on Fridav morning. If an agreement was arrived at the memorandum could be signed, and that would dispose of tho Invtjrcargfll dispute as well. OTAGO ENGINE DRIVERS, FIREMEN AND GREASERS. Mr Haymes appeared for the union. Ho said a complete settlement had been arrived at. Mr Cookson, who appeared for tho employers, said he would ask for exemption for the New Zealand Sugar of Milk and Casein Company. The company did not desire full exemption. It was prepared to pay the union wages, but would not be able to work under the hours named. Exemption was granted to tho company in the previous award.

Mr Haymes said ho did not object, if the conditions applying to the fi : <?"z ; ng companies wore included to cover the Sugar of Milk Company. This course was agreed to. EXEMPTIONS.

Mr Cookson also applied for exemption for tho Kaikorai and ' Roslyn 1 ramway Companies, and Mornington (City (Corporation) Tramway. He said that previously the Roslyn and Kaikorai employees were provided for in the hill trams award, but the Mornington men were not. Since tho last award tho City Corporation had taken over the Mornington trams.

Mr Ilaymes said that neither the Roslyn nor Kaikorai employees were working under an award or an agreement. They had cancelled their registration under the Conciliation and Arbitration Act. In tho past the Kaikorai and Roslyn trams were bound under the tramways award. Tho engine drivers in Mornington had been provided for by the engine driver's award for many years. It was the wish of the Mornington engine drivers that they should be so provided for . Ho claimed that they should continue to bo so bound until, such time as they were oovered by the proposed new award now being considered by the proprietories of the hill and city trains. He contended that the parties should be retained as parties to the engine drivers and firemen's award.

'Hie President: There is no reason why you should not remain under this award, and then it could be superseded if the new award came in all right. Mr C. F. Alexander (manager of tie Corporation Tramways) said the men in Mornington were governed by the engine-drivers' award; the men in the Kaikorai and Roslyn service wero governed by an agreement which was embodied in the Kaikorai and Roslyn tramways award. Ho suggested they should go on as at present until some settlement had been come to in the tramways industrial dispute now under consideration. The two men concerned in tho Mornington service wero in an entirely different position from the men working a li-day period. Tho President said the best plan would be to put tho three companies undo: clause 16 until tho now agreement was arrived at. The same wages as in the present recommendation could be paid, the present hours, holidays, and the Sunday hours to bo the same for the different trams until a now arrangement was oome to. The new arrangement could supersede the enginedrivers' award. If it was not accepted they could remain as theiy were.

Mr Haymes: That means tho same wages as in the recommendation?

The President: Yes. q Mr Alexander: And tho same conditions as endorsed in tho hill companies' award? The President: Yes. Wo aro going to pat them under the present engine-drivers' award.

Mr Cookson also applied for exemption for Murrays (Ltd.). Mr Haymes said he had no objection, if prevision were made for tho company to pay not less wages than was provided for in the award. The current wa£o there was 9s per day for men engaged in and about the factory. Mr Cookson said tho company employed enginoeTS who wero salaried men. Thev did not, however, employ a certificated 'engine-driver. The mon at 9s a day were Dimply labourers. All tho dairy companie3 wero exempted from, foe-dm&oa 1 avyaji

The President: I think yoa had better strike them out. If circumstances altered they could always bo added. GENERAL LABOURERS (QUARRY WORKERS).

Mr Eva us appealed against tho exemption of tho Taieri County Council from tho preference clause of the award. Mr Cookson said that whon tho last award was made tho Taieri County Council was mado a party, but subsequently tho court, after hearing evidence, exempted it from tho provisions of the preference clause. The council used a travelling stone crusher, and it was quite impossible for it to apply for a member of tho union.

Tho President: As exemption was granted before wo should exempt them again. Mr Evans said tho facilities for communicating with tho union office had been gTeatly improved since tho .previous award. There was now no difficulty in getting into touch with him, as tho secretary. It was only reasonable to suppose that the members of the union should have preference *of employment if any of their members were out of work.

Mr Cookson said the stone crusher picked up men as they wero required. It would be ridiculous to havo to send into town for such workers. They wero only taken on for a fortnight or a month at a time. The President said the court was satisfied there should bo no alteration from tho present exemption. GENERAL LABOURERS (BUILDERS' LABOURERS).

Mr Evans said a complete recommendation had been arrived at.

Mr Cookson asked for exemption for parties not in business as builders—namely, the New Zealand Drug Company, J. Palmer and Son, Ross and Glendining, Speight and Co, and tho Taieri and Peninsula Milk Supply Co. Mr Scott: Have any of these been bound before' Mr Evans: All of them.

Mr Cookson said they had possibly been overlooked. It was a matter of principle that they should not be bound. Mr Evans said some of these firms employed builders' labourers ali the year round. Ho had applications for 12 labourers from Kempthorne and Prosser at the present time for building and general alterations abo-it their premises. Palmer and Son had been in tho award for some considerable tiino. Periodically they had labourers working outside the quarry altogether. Ho believed they took contracts for tho supply and spreading of metal. Mr Cookson: These are not builders.

Mr Evans said Messrs Ross and Glendininjr supendsed contract work given out on a percentage basis. They were doing the work themselves.

The President: I do not see how any harm can bo done. If they do not employ builders' labourers fthey are not affectcd; if they do they pay the wages. Mr Cookson said Mr Evans's statements regarding building by Messrs Ross and Glendining were quite unsupported. He knew that at the present time a big contract for work at the Kaikorai Valley was being oarried out under tho ordinary contract system. Tho company was not building tho place on a percentage basis. Mr Evans said his statement that building was being carried out on a, percentage basis was correct. Some of tho firms employed oarp enters, painters, and electric workers. The court decided to leave the parties under the award. AWARDS. Complete recommendations come to between the Conciliation Commissioner in the following disputes were made into awards accordingly: —Saddlers, boot repairers, engine-drivers, -firemen and greasers, stonemasons, general labourers (coal yard, quarrymen, local bodies, and builders' employees), and painters. PARTIES ADDED. W. S. Smith and J. Marshall (Lurosden) were added to the bakers and pastrycooks' award. The court then adjourned • till this morning.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19181126.2.3

Bibliographic details

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17482, 26 November 1918, Page 2

Word Count
1,879

ARBITRATION COURT. Otago Daily Times, Issue 17482, 26 November 1918, Page 2

ARBITRATION COURT. Otago Daily Times, Issue 17482, 26 November 1918, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert