CONCILIATION BOARD.

Otago Witness, Volume 25, Issue 2321, 25 August 1898, Page 15

CONCILIATION BOARD.

' PvECOMMENDATIONS IN THE FL'RMI-

TUKE DISPUTE

I ' Tho Conciliation Board mcl on the 16ih insfc. to deliver its recommendations with j regard to the furniture trade dispute. Mr I Sim. the chairman of tho board, provided, and j all tho members were present. I The recommendations of the board were as follows: — The Board of Conciliation having taken into

. consideration the above dispute, and having I heard the parties and the evidence adriucc/l, do hereby leconxmend as follows: — That the parties to the said dispute enter into an industrial agreement for a term of three j years fro'n the first day of September, IS9B, j sui-h agreement to contain the same provisions as tho^e contained i" the industrial agreement : of the first rhy of March, ISS7, subject to the following iiiod'ncxtions : —

1. The minimum wage for cabinetmakers, cbairmakerp, and upholsterers to ba 8& Gd per day, and for Fiencli polishers Ss per day. 2. The prices in Ihe at'^ched Ic-^s A mcl B to be paid for piecework. The polishers' log to be the ETune as that annexed to tho former industrial agreement. Twenty per cent, to be the m.ixiinuta deducted for machine v.ork on cabinetmakers' log, 10 per cent, to ba the mpxuuiun deducted ior machine work on chairniakers' log. 3. Overtime to be between the hours of 5.10 p.m. and S a.m. ; time and a quarter to be paid up till 9 p.m., and tune and a-half iroin 9 p.m. till 8 a.m!

4. The employer shall notify the men whether they ere on piece or clay work before starting their job. 5. Men to have the option of working by the piece. 6. Kmployors in employing labour shall not discriminate between unionists and non-unicn-lats. boHi shall work together 111 harmony and under the same conditions, and thall receive cqiri piy for equal v.orlr. Employers shall not in the employment or dismissal of hands or m the conduct of their business do anything which will either directly or indirect 'y operate to the i/iiury of the union.

The Chairman staled t'oat with regard to the Jog, they had adopted the log as settled al the conference, except that tl'C-y had struck out the extras and left them to be fixed by agreement between employers and employees ; foiling that, to bo adjusted by a committee. He supposed the better course would bo to adjourn to give the parties time to consider the recommendations.

Mr Hood said that there were same questions which the union were in doubt about. The first was regarding the penalties. It was understood tl.at all agreements were practically valueless by the decision of the higher court, unless there was a penalty attached. The Chairman replied that such was not the case. The act provided for a penalty for breaches of the agreement in a sum not exceeding £500. Mr Hood : That is a general penalty. Must there not be p. penalty stated for each clause? The Chairman replied in the negative. The act provided that the parties may fix a penalty, otherwise a penalty up to £500 might be imposed. In the caae before Mr Carow the other day there was no express provision in the agreement for a penalty. The penalty was imposed under the general provisions of the act.

Mr Hood said that there was some difficulty as to the signatures to the agreement. There was some difficulty as to who should sign it first.

The Chairman said that there should be no difficulty on that score. Each employer signed it, it was supposed, on the understanding thai lie was not bound unle&3 it was signed by the others. If the employers were agreed as to the terms, it could be arranged that if any outsiders refused to sign the agreement the union should proceed against them in the Arbitration Court.

Mr Hood was understood to say that the union would do that.

Mr Millar asked if the Emphryers' Association was registered. The Chairman replied in the negative, and slated that the members of the association were brought before the board as individual employers. Mr Chisholm said the employers had made up theiv minds exactly a» to the position of matters, and they had no intention of accepting the recommendation the board had made. They had made a substantial addition to the log with the view of meeting the men. They were quite aware thai ihe Christclmrch board fixed the minimum wage al 8s 6d, but they had a lower log there than they had in Dunedin, where men could earn 9s a day working on the log. The Chairman understood Mr Chisholm to say that there was no chance of the employers accepting the recommendation of the board. Mr Chisholm said of course the employers would have a meeting. It was only right that their representatives before the board should meet them and state the result of the board's recommendation.

The Chairman: Shall we adjourn or not?

Mr Chi&holm said so far as the employers were concerned there was no occasion for an adjournment. The Chairman : Do you say, on behalf of the Employers' Association, that you do not agree to the terms? If so, then we will at once report to the court that we were unable to settle the dispute. Mr Chisholm: Of course we don't object to an adjournment. The Chairman: The object of it is this:

The parties may wish I')' cum-ider whether they accept, the terms or not. Bui i[ you, on Poi'alf of the association, say you absolutely decline to accept the recommendation, it is useless to adjourn. Mr Chisholm : I have only stated what my judgment is. 1 suppose, if they wish an adjournment, we have no objection to it. The Chairman then intimated that the board would adjourn till Saturday morning at 10 o'clock.