THE BAKERS' DISPUTE,

Otago Witness, Issue 2317, 28 July 1898, Page 11

THE BAKERS' DISPUTE,

Certain affidavits were fUed in the Supremo Court in connection with the applications which were made to Mr Justice Pennefathet for leave to issue writs of attachment against William Wright, Peter John Calder, and James Walker for alleged non-compliance with terms of the award made in December last by the Court of Arbitration iv the bakers' dispute, but they were not referred to i-i the course of the proceedings.

WILLIAM WRIGHT'S CASE.

The affidavit of William Cunningham Simpson eeb out; thab he is a member of the Dunedin Bakers' and Pastrycooks' Union, and that William Wright; is a mc-mber of the Master Bakers' Association, which, the deponent stated, was registered as au industrial union pursuant to the provisions of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Aob, that William Wright personally took part in the dispute between the union and the Master Bakers 'Association before the Arbitration Court, and wan, the deponenb was informed and verily believed, present when the award was delivered. The affidavit proceeded :

By the said award it was adjudged inter alia that the proportion of apprentices to men should be as follows :— For the first thive men, or any less number, one apprentice ; for more than three men and up to s ; x men, two apprentices ; and so on in the same proportion. The said William Wright employs in his bakery four men — namely, Gilbert Stvatton, James Reid, James Taylor, and Albert T. White ; and employs in his said bakery four apprentices— namely. D.tvid D^Diels, Peter Neilson, liobsrt Johnson, and John Thompson, being two *ppveutices iii excess of the number provided for by ih3 said award.

The affidavit of William Wright, ia reply, stated : —

1. I have read the affidavit of William Cunningham Simpson, sworn herein on 13th day of June, 1898. •

2 The Master Bakers' Association of Dunedin was not on the 9tb day of December, 1897, and never has been an association registered as an industrial union under the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1594, as alleged in paragraph 4 of tho said affidavit, or under any other act of Parliament. 3. It is not true, as alleged in paragraph 8 of the said affidavit, ihtt at the time of swearing the said affidavit I employed in my bakery two apprentices in excess of the number provided for by the award mentioned iv the said affidavit. 4 At the time of swearing the said affidavit I employed, and I still employ, in my said bakery eight men— namely, Gilbert Stratton, JamesTaylor, J.nnes Reid, Albert T. White, Robert Cook, Henry Laing, Duudas Porteous Wright, and Adam Edgar, none of whom then received, or now receive, a3 wages less than the sum of £i 5s psr week. 5 At <Ue same time I employ in my said bakery, and I still employ, three apprentices only— namely, David Daniels, Peter Neilson, and ltobert Johnson.

6 Juhn Thomson, named in the said paragraph 8, was at the time of swearing the said affidavit employed by me in the said bakery, but he was not then, and never has been, employed by me as an apprentice

PETER JOHN CALDER'S CASE.

Thfl affidavit of George Aiming, secretary of the Dauediu Bakers' and Pastrycooks' Union, after reciting that Peter John Calder is a member of the Master Bakers' Association, stated that by the award of the Court of Arbitration it was adjudged inter alia that no second hand receive leas than £2 10* per week and no table hand less than £2 53 per week, and that the said Ptter John Caliler was ab the date of the award, and still is, employing one Joseph Ayres as a table hand in his bakery at a weekly wage of £1 12s 6d.

The answering affidavit of Peter John Oalder was to the following effect :—

1. I am a baker carrying on business in Walker street, Dunedin. 2. My business is too small to occupy a journeyman in addition to myself, and up to the month of March last I did the work myself, with the assistance of an improver, to whom 1 paid a weekly wage of £1 12s 6d. ?>. In the month of March last my improver left, and one Joseph Ayre? applied for the job, and offered to take the improve) 's place at the same wages. I told him 1 did not require a journeyman, but he begged of me to employ him, telling me that he had been for 10 months out of work, that his wife was almost starving, and he had found it necessary to sell some of his furniture to get money to buy food, and he was unable to get shoes for himself. 4. I did not engage the said Joseph Ayrcs as a table hand, and his work is not that of a table hand, but of an improver or an apprentice who has had some experience, and during the greater part of his time he is employed at work that does nob require the skill of a journeyman. Ilis average working time does not exceed seven hours a day. The following affidavit by Joseph Ayers was also filed:—

1 lam a journeyman baker, and am at present employed by Peter John Oalder at a weekly wage of £\ 153.

2. I entered the service of the said Peter John Calder about the 11th March last, and for about 10 months prior to that date J had been unable to pet employment. ICnowing that an improve].' employed by the said Peter John Calder had left I applied for the job. The said Peter John Calder said he had not sufficient woik for a journeyman in addition to himself, and that an improver would serve his purpose. He did not wish to take me on, but I explained my necessitous circumstances, and informed him, as the fact was, that I had been out of work for about 10 months and my wife was almost starving, that I was in debt and without credit, and had been forced to sell some of my furniture in order to obtain food, and that I was without shoe 3 for my feet.

3 Yielding to my importunity the Baid Toter John Calcler engaged me in the place of the improver who had left, and I consider I am sufficiently paid for -the work I have to do. I wan not engaged as a table hand, and my work ia not that of a table hand, but of an impiover or an apprentice who has had some experience. During a large proportion of my time I am employed in work that does not require the skill of a journeyman, and the

[ business is not sufficient to occupy the timo of a journeyman in addition to the said Peter John (Jaldor. My average working time doe 3 not exesed Sevco hourß a day 4. During tho time I have been employed by the Kaul Peter. John Calder 1 have been at. libcity to leave at any time, but I have not seeu an opportunity of getting better employment, and I claim the right to earn my living as best I can wflen I caunot get work as a journeyman baker. JAMES WALKER'S CASE. The aifi'2>ivit of George Aiming, in the case against Jamen Walker, sst out that by tbe award it was adjudged inter atia that it overtime was required time and R-qu<irter should bo p&id up to 6 p.m. nnd time and a-half up to 10 p.m., aud that no work should be done after that houx 1 , and that the said James Walker had been since the date of the said award, and still was, working fche workmen employed by him in his bakery more than eight and a-half hours per day, and wa3 not paying them overtime. In an answering oflliavit James Walker declared :—: — That on receiving the copy of the award, I read the same over personally to all hands employed by me, and informed them that I on no account wished them to work overtime. That in oider to avoid overtime being worked, i I re avranged the manner in ■which iiiy baking business was to be conducted, aud distributed the workout more equally throughout the week. That it is quite unnecessary for any of my hands to work overtime, and I was not aware until receiving this summons that they did si, my strict instruction* to my second hand— who tookehmge of the bakehouse during my absence- being that no overtime should b8 worked. Tart until receiviug the summons herein I vas not :"quested by ;iny of my hands to pay tue>u pv j : time, nor did I know that they worked ovci lime, no: «ud I s«uy complaint made to me on the subject. The work set out for my hands is quite capable of being finished iv the prtscribed time, and if any .of the hands have to work overtime, it has been their own carelessness or inattention to the woik during working houis. Thot the only overtime which my hands hive ! worked since receipt of the a^ardvas on Good Friday, at which time the two hands worked till about 11 o'clock at night oa tho Thursday preceding, for which overtime they were duly puid. That I have had no request made to me for any other overtime since receipt of the said award. An affidavit was also filed by William John Ritchie, who has been employed by James Wplker for several months past, and who says : — That tbe amount of work set by the said Jameg Walker in the bakehouse for his hands is quite capable of being accomplished iv the time prescribed- namely. 8£ hours per day. That if any overtime has been worked by any of the hands of th« said James Walker, it waa against his will and without his knowledge that such was done, and it \y as through the inattention of the hand;) so working that they required to work overtimu. i