Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Mr Boreham and the Shearers' Union. TO THE EDITOR.

Sir, — Id ths Witness oi February 6 Mr Eoreham, in the Agricultural and Pa^tora! Workers' column, goes out of his way to throw tint at the management of the Ota'-p f-hoaif-rs' Union. I take it for granted that. bt .ug a shcarei, Mr Boreham is a- menibet oi that organisation, and, like a lot more irtinbers, simply pays hi 35» and sits back and growls, instead of putting his shotiWer to the wheel and giving things a push olonp. Tlic reason for thu failure of various organisations of the workois is owing to the apathy til own by the <Bembers If they each and all -noikcd together to assist the management, instead of sitting down like a lot of bumps, en a log, they might have a diffeient tale to tell. As Mr Boreham has this season heard a lot of grumbling, I take it thai it is owing to th© present very unsatisfactory and very lopsided agreement under which '.he shearing is being carried out. I may inform Mr Boreham a7id others that the credit or discredit for this agreement lies with Ecreham's much-lauded Cant-erbuiy Shearers' Union, or. rather, I should say, the humility of the individuals sent by that union to hold a conference with the Canterbury t-heep-owners at Cimstchurch in th© ear'y part ci the shearing season of 1905. Xow, as *!ie Ctago Shearers' Union and the Otago Sh-eep-ovmers' Union de egates did not meet till nearly 12 months after that, the Cantcrbuiy agifernent was the only basis to woik on. and aa so-and-eo v;as the case in Canterbury, "now could we expect to do better .' We ha& to be satufied with an agreement nearly the same as the one under which Canterbury lad already done one season's bhesamg. I will now gne the unsatisfactory clauses in the Canterbury agreement as compared with their past agreement First, as regaids price of shearing, I will admit they got a rise of Is 8d pei 100 for machines and; a paltry 4d per 100 for hand shears. Under the aid agreement, when 25 per cent, of the flock were daggy, 2s 6d per 100 extra was to be paid. Under the present agreement there ia nothing in respect to daggy sheep; so, strictly speaking, the price of eh earing in Canterbury in at reduced ratec ivo provision is mtdo foi extra payment for ram stags or doublef.eeced sheep. The hours of work can be from 5 a.m. to 5 p.m., 5.50 a.m. to 5.30 pm, 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., shearing to cease at 4 p.m. in Saturday, or at 12 noon on Saturday if a full week. This means, where shearing starts at 5 a.m., the ehed nanda work an hour longer in the week than at a, shed where shearing starts at 6 a.m. When shearing wet ewes, the boBS can extend the runs to the extent of half an hour t» com- : plete a cut-out. This is Tight enough when. not abused. One boss informed his shearers last year that he -could have made them ! shear half an hour later every day when shearing wet «we« xl he lilted. Kow. th«

worst clause cf all is tlie one relating to wet shqep. Clause 9. "In the event of & dispute arising as to -wet sheep, the shed manager may talie a vote by ballot, the yeisons entitled .o vote being the shearers, with tho exception cf the shearers representative (\rho shall not vote except in case of a tie), the shed manager, and the woolc'nsser; the majority xo rule. Provided the owner, in case ho considers the sheep too wet, shall be at liberty to turnt hem out." As object to shear wet sheep, because they think that by shearing them wet: they may endanger their health, and we have medical evidence to prove that wet sheep are injurious to men shearing them, I — and, in fs>ct, all shearers — think that they are the only ones who should have a say as ia whether the sheep aie fit to be shorn or not. Why the shed boss and the woolclaseer should have a vote is beyond the ken of any shearer. They are not likely to injure their health through wet sheep. The woolclasser certainly might get rheumatism in the fingers hpndhng the wool, but when the shed manager com-es in I do not 'enow. Giving tha representative a casting vote is on'y a farce, as lie never gets much of a chance "to use it. In a shed where an even number cf shearers are engaged he never gets it at all. The shearers by a- majority may decide the sheep are wet, and be compelled to shear them. Take a case m a sh-ed where I wa« shearing this year. There were 18 shearers. The vote was 10 dry. 9 wet. Of course, the boss and woolcla-ssei voted dry. That left eight shearers dry. nine wet, with, the representative 10 wet I know the representative would have voted wet, as I was the representative. In the face of this vote the shearers weie compelled to shear because eight said the sheep were day. I may add that five of us knocked off, md were ordeiej back to work by the boss. On our refusing to go back, we >vere later m the day ordered to go back and shear or %o. It is need"ess to say we went ICow, as the boss can turn the sheep o\vt at any time, even if every one of the shearers said they were dry, it would be only fair >to give a shearer the same privilege. Suppose a clause was inserted that no shearer be compelled to cheai sheep 1 a had leasonnble grounds to consider wet ; then if a man thought they were too wet for him he would be at liberty to go to Iha hut, and tho=e who liked to take the nsk could do so ; and if the master liked to chance setting fire to wool ships be could also take the risk. There are some peop'ewho think fchearers do not want to shear sheep after ram, not because it is likely to injure them, but becauEe they want to lie in dirty, evil-smelling "huts and eat food that, in pome cases, is not fit for white men, or just for the sake of being against the boss ; or because, as one sarcastic individual told ua a couple of seasons «go, we had not loafed enoiigh. Shearers come out to earn money *o keep their wives and children, and when sheep are dry they are ready to shear them. Truly, the Canterbury agreement is a, beamj from" a master's point of view. It would! ba a pity to lose it. Mr Boreham thinks the ruembers of the Canterbury Union are proud of this agreement. We don't think the same. One thing we have to be thankful for, and that is that both, the Canterbury and Otago agreements have only one more season to lun. Then it is- to be hoped that whichever union goe3 to a conference first will select men with a little bit of backbone ; men who will demand a fair thing between mat. and roaster, and, what is more, see they get it. and not give m to the demands of the other side every tim«. As regards the ama'gam.ation of the two unions, the reason, thia vcte is now being taken :s because a 100 of <=heds sent in resolutions to try and have this done, and I think, for the benefit of the pastoral and agricultural workers of the- South Island, it would be a splendid thing to have one union representing a!L cla&ees. If the present Aibitration Act will not allow it. steps should tie taken to have the art altered to meet the case, and if that could not be done it could be managed otherwise by exchange of tickets. Re the Galloway shearers' resolution, mentioned by Mr Boreham. I may add thait I was vhe move* of the TeEolution, which, read-. "That steps be taken to bring about the amalgamation of the Otago and Canterbuiv Shearers' Unions che same to lie reorganised on thp same lines as the A.W.U.. to take in the whole of the South Inland , annual eulisenption to bf — Sb^arerb' cook°, shepherds' cooks, 10= , other cla^=ea of labourers on station", ns per yepi " Thr=e motions from varioup fhe<ls are spii* in with the hope that a conference will l>e he!?l between the two unions to thoroughly di^ruts thsse impoitanfa question I foi one am peifectly satisfied with the management of the Otago Shearers' Union, sr>d I may s»y that if members would on'y try and assist the leaders .here would b» less cau=p for complaint. In conclusion, I may say I have nothing; to do with the management of the Dtagi Shearers' Union lam only a financial membpr of it ami as such I claim the right to rpplv to the criticisms of Mr Bowham cr any other irresponsible individual — I im, ttr , Jack Towksend. Terras. lebruary I'L, 1907.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/OW19070220.2.61.14

Bibliographic details

Otago Witness, Issue 2762, 20 February 1907, Page 21

Word Count
1,525

Mr Boreham and the Shearers' Union. TO THE EDITOR. Otago Witness, Issue 2762, 20 February 1907, Page 21

Mr Boreham and the Shearers' Union. TO THE EDITOR. Otago Witness, Issue 2762, 20 February 1907, Page 21

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert