ARBITRATION COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3994, 30 September 1930, Page 69

ARBITRATION COURT.

OTAGO HARBOUR BOARD AND WATERSIDE WORKERS.

His Honor Mr Justice Frazer has given the Arbitration Court interpretation of the New Zealand Waterside Workers’ award in connection with an application by the inspector of awards for an opinion whether, in the case of the Otago Harbour Board’s new electric cranes, the work of driving them is covered by the award, and, if such is the case, whether members of the Waterside Workers’ Union are entitled to employment on such work in preference to the board’s permanent employees. The court’s opinion is as follows:— “The Otago Harbour Board has for several years owned and operated a crane similar to, but smaller, than, the new cranes. It lias been the custom of the board to employ a member of its permanent staff to drive this crane. No question has at any time, before or since the coming into operation of the present award, been raised in respect of this custom. The Harbour Board is required by section 192 of the Harbours Act, 1923, to supply labour to operate its cranes and other appliances. This does not in itself exempt the board from the duty of complying with the provisions of an award to which it is a party, in so far as those provosions are binding upon it; but having regard to the construction, intricacy, and potential danger of the mechanism of electric cranes, the board is entitled to decide whether it will employ casual waterside workers or its own permanent hands to drive them. If it employs casual labour, it must do so in accordance with the relevant provisions of the waterside workers’ award? If it elects to employ its own permanent hands for this work, it is, in respect of those workers, exempted by clause 53 of the award from the operation of these provisions. Therefore, the work of driving the cranes is covered by the award if it is performed by casual workers, but not if it is performed by permanent employees of the board. Members of the Waterside Workers’ Union are not entitled to preferential employment on this work.”