ARBITRATION COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23515, 1 June 1938, Page 6

ARBITRATION COURT

GROCERS’ ASSISTANTS NEW WAGE SCALE CLAIMED EMPLOYERS OPPOSE FIVE-DAY WEEK (Per United Press Association! WELLINGTON. May 31. Preparatory to making the first Dominion award covering grocers’ assistants, the Second Court of Arbitration to-day commenced to hear arguments and’ evidence on behalf of the workers and the employers. The award will apply to the whole of the Dominion except Taranaki. Mr F. D. Cornwall was the workers’ advocate, and Mr W. E. Anderson the employers’ advocate. Mr Cornwall said the workers claimed a 40-hour week of five days, with work between 8.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m., but no work on Saturdays and one meal hour each day between noon end 2 p.m, Remarking that the onus v/as on the employers to prove that the 40-hour week was impracticable, he said it had always been argued that it was impracticable because grocers stocked perishables. The master butchers in Hamilton, however, had signed an agreement providing for no work to be done on Saturdays, and the stock of a butchei was more perishable than that of a grocer. If, however, the court was unable to award a five-day week, it was submitted that it should not allow more than 40 hours, even if there were work on five days and a-half.

The workers claimed the following wages:—Assistants and drivers under 16 years, £1 2s 6d to £1 7s 6d; between 16 years and 17 years, £1 10s to £1 15s; 17 years to 21 years, £2 2s 6d to £4 ss; 21 years and over, £5 10s; provision hands, £6; department manager, £7; branch manager, £7 10s; first counter hand, £6; lorry drivers, £5 15s. The employers, in their counter-proposals, were offering, 27s 6d to a man between 18 and 18 years of age and 32s 6d for one between 19 and 20. although they were able to do a man’s full work. In support of the claim for £5 10s for adults, Mr Cornwall quoted rates in other trades. The workers claimed that the employment of females, in a grocery shop should be prohibited, but they might be employed in the confectionery and tobacco departments. A grocer’s work was far too heavy for a woman, it was claimed.

Three witnesses were called for the workers.

It was submitted by Mr Anderson that, although the law was that the employers had to show that a shorter working week than the workers had had was impracticable, the court, having been satisfied once, the onus was shifted to the workers to prove that conditions had changed sufficiently to make an aleration in the award desirable. The workers’, witnesses had not done so, Mr Anderson contended. Moreover, Parliament did not intend the 40-hour week to be observed by shops. He pointed out that closing on Saturday mornings would allow unfair competition in grocery lines by other types of businesses that did not dose on Saturday mornings. Forty to 52 per cent, of a grocer’s business was done on Friday and Saturday morning. and the work of serving customers and delivering goods' could not be speeded up, because the shop staff was a team, and additional men would get in the way. If thbre were no late night or Saturday morning a. large amount of “impulse buying’ would be lost, never to be recovered. Mr Anderson contended that the court had heard no evidence that wages should be raised. The wage scale the wrokers claimed was clumsy, and gave. new titles - to ordinary grocers’ assistants in an endeavour to raise wages. The employers proposed a table of , wages which, Mr Anderson said, was already in wide use and which was simple to understand. It provided a wage ’of 15s for boys commencing work under 15. years of age. rising to 85s in the ninth year and 95s thereafter: 17s 6d for workers starting work at the ages between 15 and 16, rising to 95s in the ninth year; and similarly' up to starting ages between 20 and 21. Workers starting at 21 and over would get 50s in the first year. 85s in the second, and 95s in the third and following years. They offered £5 for branch managers or workers in charge of shops. Girls in tobacco and delicatessen departments should be excluded from the aiVard. not being grocers’ assistants. Mr Anderson had not concluded his address when the court adjourned until 10 a.m. to-morrow.