DISPUTES REFERRED TO COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22999, 30 September 1936, Page 9

DISPUTES REFERRED TO COURT

IS ARBITRATION COMPULSORY? POINT RAISED IN BAKERS’ CASE (Per United Press Association! WELLINGTON, Sept. 29. .The contention that arbitration Was compulsory once a dispute had been referred to the court was made in the Arbitration Court to-day by the employers when the workers sought to withdraw the bakers and pastrycooks’ dispute from the court. The employers argued that the dispute could not be withdrawn under the law as it now stood, an alternative submission being that if that were possible the law should be amended.

The dispute was before three sittings of the Conciliation Council, and both parties waited separately on the Minister of Labour (Mr H. T. Armstrong) and the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr D. G. Sullivan). The Minister of Industries and Commerce also attended a conference of both parties. The Conciliation Council having failed to reach a settlement, the dispute came before the court to-day. The daily hours of work on which there had been a misunderstanding were also discussed.

Mr E. J. Watson, secretary of the New Zealand Federated Bakers’ Association of Workers, who asked leave to withdraw the case, said that cases had been withdrawn from the court by both parties, and one had been withdrawn in Auckland recently. Section 80 of the Act gave the court unlimited power ana, consequently, he contended that the court had power to grant an application for withdrawal. Mr T. O. Bishop, secretary of the New Zealand Employers’ Federation, who appeared for the master bakers, opposed the withdrawal, and argued that when claims were referred to the court they were before the court, and neither party had power to withdraw from arbitration which was compulsory. If the court did not uphold this contention, he suggested that the court should state a case for the opinion of the Court of Appeal, so that the matter could be finally decided. The court adjourned till to-mor-row morning to allow'the employers to decide whether the hours questions only should be considered by the court.

Mr Justice Page said that if the employers were unable to come to that decision the court would have to consider Mr Watson's application for withdrawal, which was a legal question not without difficulties, and the court would not be able to give a decision immediately.