WATERSIDE WORKERS

Otago Witness, Issue 3488, 18 January 1921, Page 23

WATERSIDE WORKERS

THE BONUS QUESTION. BALLOT TO BE TAKEN. The “stop-work” meeting of the waterside workers on r l\iesday was a protracted one, and extended beyond the usual time. Work was resumed in the ordinary way on Wednesday morning at- 8 o’clock, and good progress was made in the way of discharging and loading the vessels at the wharves. Work on Tuesday was commenced at 3 p.in., which was as soon after the meeting as was possible. Concerning the meeting of the men, one of the principal matters dealt- with was the proposed amalgamation of the Dunedin and Pott Chalmers Waterside Workers’ Unions. The scheme for amalgamation lias been fully considered by members of both unions and a ballot on the question will be taken in the near future. In common with other waterside workers throughoutthe dominion, the Dunedin men considered the proposed increase in wages offered by the employers at Tuesday’s meeting. The question, which was discussed at considerable length, will be decided on a plebiscite vote of the whole of the waterside workers in the dominion. No information was available S 3 to the result of the Dunedin men’s ballot on this question. EMPLOYERS’ BONUS OFFER. WELLINGTON, January 12. It now transpires that tho actual bonus offer made to the Waterside Workers’ Union by the employers was Id per hour, as

against the Arbitration Court’s award of fd per hour. It is explained that the bonus was increased because the returns show that the average time worked by each waterside worker is 36 hours per week. This would make the average bonus equivalent to 3s per week, the amount allowed by the court. It was this offer which was considered by the Waterside Workers’ Unions throughout tho dominion yesterday. A ballot is being taken on the question of the acceptance or rejection of the offer, and the indications are that the offer will be rejected. Reports show that all the meetings were largely attended, and a telegram from New Plymouth states: “It is understood the offer was rejected practically unanimously.”