GARDENERS AND THE ARBHRATION ACT.

Otago Witness, Issue 2736, 22 August 1906, Page 8

GARDENERS AND THE ARBHRATION ACT.

A TERROR TO LOVERS OF FLOWERS. | GPbou Oub Own Cobrespondext.) CHRISTCHURCH, August 16. The gardeners dispute was taken at the Arbitration Court to-day. Thi6 was an application by the Christchurch gardeners for an industrial award. There were over 100 parties cited before the court, a number of them being- persons whose grooms or coachmen do gardening work when not otherwise engaged. Sir John Hall was among those cited. The Hon. E. C. J. Stevens applied to beexempted on the ground that his gardening work was done by contract. He put in documents. His Honor ordered that copies of such papers be supplied to the union, as it might desire to dispute the contention. Dr Nedwill applied to be exempted on the ground that his man only mowed his tennis court durinfr six months of the voar, and during the other six did no gardening work at all. His Honor said the objection would be noted, but could not be adjudicated upon at the moment. Mr T. G. Russell then submitted that his name, and those of others like- him, should be struck out on the ground that the object of the act was to prevent strikes and lockouts, to obviate, m fact, industrial disputes, and was never intended to interfere with arrangements in private homes. It must be shown that there was an industrial dispute, otherwise any man in any employment could apply to the court for an award. If he engaged a gardener from one of the nurserymen the man would be under an award, but if he had a servant who did private work for him that was different. The act aimed at dealing with competition in industries, and regulated wages with due regard thereto, but in private employment, where the employer desired no monetary benefit, the position was entirely different. It was absurd to suggest that a private servant who did gardening work amongst other duties was in the same position as a gardener who worked jn the industry for a nurseryman. These men who wore engaged by private employers ought to form a union of their own. If they could be pointed to the award it would mean that nobody could handle- a spade or cultivate flowers without oomiiiK under the award. In conclusion, Mr Russell said there was nothing in common between a Jack of all trades and a gardener engaged in the industry. He eubwiited that he was engaged in no industry and no competition, and that he ought not to be cited before the court. For the union it was argued in reply that the act applied to callings as well as industries, and private employers should be cited. His Honor sakl he could not decide upon. this question off hand. The point was an important one, required careful consideration, and he would take time to think it over. A large number of private employers applied to be struck out on the same grounds as those advanced by Mr Ruesell. Mr Murray, for the union, then briefly referred to the changes required in the present award by the gardeners. The chief of these were a 44 hours week, classification of work instead of workers, a minimum wage of £2 73 6d, and for labourers of £2 2s 6d ; any employee receiving board and lodgings as part payment not to have a greater reduction than 10s a week made for it, and in the case of a cottage being provided a maximum rent of 10s to be charged. . . , One of the union's witnesses said there were probably some hundreds of jrardeners and gardeners' labourers employed by nurserymen. There were 71 members in the union. Ho would not object to a weekly half-holiday at his expense if proper wages were paid. He did not consider 8s a day to be fair wages. If a man was put at the same work as he was that man would be paid the same as he was, but if he i (witness) had more experience he ought to get "a little extra." Another witness contended that nobody but a gardener should do gardening work. If a man did gardening work he ought to get a permit to do other work. It waa not tho object of the union to drive men whJ did general work— including gardening for private employers — out of employment. If an employer decided to give up his garden because it had become a too expensive luxury, that would react detrimentally on nurserymen and seedsmen. Old men not able to earn the wage of a gardener, and only able to do general work, ought to be "shot out," though such had done him no harm. In tho course of the hearing, Mr Justice Chapman said that he would almost become an interested party to the dispute. He had a very old man that worked in his garden, and did odd jobs. He came and went when he liked, kept whatever hours he wished, and whatever days. He knew where tho bulbs were, while another man would probably put hia spade through him. The union's reprc->«'ntati\e that the , man could come under the incompetent I workmen's clai^e. '"On the contrary," replied the Judge, I "he is peifectly competent.'

Fifty professors in American colleges and universities have been selected to receive pensions amounting in all to £14.000 annually, from the £2,000,000 pension fund for teachers established by Mi Andrew Carnegie. The special Gakoxh Fehtti.iser mad« tip by Nimmo aitd Blaib will bo found to give excellent results when used fcr Flowers aud Vegetables; also for Pot Plants, in and out of freenhotise. It it pat up in 7!b bags, at Is 64 each. Ask your itorekeepei for it.