AMENDMENT OF AWARDS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 15595, 11 August 1921, Page 5

AMENDMENT OF AWARDS.

JURISDICTION OF COURT. COST OF LIVING QUESTION. CJIRLSTCIiyitOri, Aug. 6.—Variation in the cost of living is the only ground on which (he Arbitration Court, has jurisdiction to amend awards while they are in force, except by mutual .consent of the parties to the award. Tliis'wrtf the text, of a judgment given by Mr. Justice Frazer in tlie Arbitration Court. The Canterbury paper bag, carton, ami box makers asked I hat. their award he amended so as to equalise, the wages ot females with the wages paid to females in Wellington, and also asked that the award hi* continued on an equitable basis until (he expiry of other printing trade awards on April 2, 1922. "It 'is" quite true," said 'liis Honor, "that in the past the Court has on occasions altered the basic rale, where an application has been properly before the Court, on account, of>the cost of living, which, under the war legislation, is founded on increases in the cost of living since (he date of the award. We have no jurisdiction unless that foundation is laid. Similarly, of course, if applications were in the reverse direction isking for a reduction there would have to be laid the foundation, of a reduction in the cost of living. Where the foundation of the cost of living had been laid the Court has gone on occasions a little further and adjusted the basic rates. In some cases, where an award is below the recognised standard, (he Court has taken the opportunity of an application properly before the Court of raising those rates. However, the law is perfectly clear on thejjoint. It rests 3ii a decision of Mr. Justice Cooper some years ago. It- has never been*questioned, 'ibis Court has no power except in accordance with tho War Legislation Act and one'or two clauses in the principal 'Act to alter an award during its .:urrenc4'. "The application before the Court is not properly based on any consideration set. out in the War Legislation Act, iind we have come to the conclusion there is no jurisdiction. It is not a rpjestion of the merits of the case, but merely the jurisdiction of the Court. As we, have no jurisdiction we have no right to deal with the matter. Jf is unfortunate that some Awards run out before others, and certain members of he trade in one district are on a better 'ooting than others'in different districts, nit that cannot be helped. To'cut the natter short, we ate quite convinced here is no power as the law stands at nesent to enable us to deal with your ipplication." -