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

WAGE REDUCTIONS

APPLICATIONS FOR EXEMPTION PROTEST AGAINST COURT’S ATTITUDE. (Per United Press Association.) AUCKLAND, August 4. In consequence of the Arbitration Court ruling out three of the four grounds on which the waterside workers’ unions of Auckland and the province applied for exemption from the 10 per cent, cut, the hearing of the case ended abruptly this morning after two hours, whereas it had been expected to last for two days. ' The "court ruled that three of the unions’ grounds were grounds for use when applying for an ordinary award. Mr J. Roberts (secretary of the New Zealand Waterside Workers’ Union) protested strongly, asserting that the court had not kept the promise made at the hearing in Wellington of the application for a general order. “ The court has now placed me in the position that I must appeal to Coesar, and Ca;sar means the men themselves. Our award has nearly run out. My own hope is we will not have to trouble the court for another award. The employers are rushing to get another agreement. We are not rushing with them. If there are any difficulties you gentlemen on both sides will have to take the responsibility.” He said he would consult his men throughout New Zealand and then tell the court at the Wellington sitting whether or not he would withdraw the whole case. Mr Justice Frazer said the court must administer the law as it found it. He regretted if there had been any misunderstanding. He did not think that Mr Roberts had been harshly treated. Mr Justice Frazer, in declining to admit evidence designed to show the increased casualnesa of waterfront work, said that if the court did so the general order for wage reduction would be nullified because every union in the country could bring evidence of it. In making the general order the court had taken into account unemployment and the casualness. If it had based its decision only on the Dominion’s reduced revenue the wage cut might have been 30 or 40 per cent, instead of 10 per cent.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ODT19310805.2.85

Bibliographic details

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21405, 5 August 1931, Page 8

Word Count
345

WAGE REDUCTIONS Otago Daily Times, Issue 21405, 5 August 1931, Page 8

WAGE REDUCTIONS Otago Daily Times, Issue 21405, 5 August 1931, Page 8

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