Labour Matters

Southland Times, Issue 12122, 30 April 1908, Page 2

Labour Matters

FASH LABOURERS' DISPUTE. A CANDID CBITIC. Per United Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH, April 29. In the course of his summing up in the farm labourers' dispute before the Conciliation Board to-day, Mr Ackland, one of the farmers' representatives, said that the object of the Union's demands was practically political. MiThorn had alleged in his opening remarks that the union "represented the large body of intelligent opinion among farm labourers" ; but he (Mr Ackland) would be very sorry to think that the class of men brought before the Board by the union represented the class of men he knew so well and for whom he had the greatest respect. The class of men met with on stations consisted of some of the finest fellows in the world. In his evidence Mr Thorn had said : "he did not think that thrift and industry would settle the labour question. If everybody were thrifty there would be many unemployed." Apparently the leaders of the labour movement were going on the assumption that for a country to succeed it was necessary for everyone to be unthrifty. The adoption of that policy would be very unfortunate for New Zealand. All the evidence showed that the demands were simply those of a few extremists in Christchurch. . The farmers said to such: "Leave us alone and attend to your affairs in town; we don't want you in the country. If you come out you will injure the whole country ; you will gradually ruin it because you do not understand the conditions." The evidence further showed that the socalled "Agricultural and Pastoral Labourers Union" did not represent the agricultural and pastoral labourers. He questioned whether any award could deal satisfactorily with the farmers who also took employment on the farms of others. DOING SICE MEITB WORK. AUCKLAND, April 29. The Arbitration Court continued Its sittings to-day. The bulk of the cases concerned breaches of awards. The '.Vailii Goldmining Company was cited for having failed to pay overtime to

a number of men in October. Mr Shanaghan, for tlie department, gave several instances of men who had worked twelve hours a, day and of others who had worked 16 hours a day it the Waikino battery. He explainad that at the time there was an epiiemic of Influenza; many men were affected,and when they did not turn up to take their shifts other men were instructed lo continue their work. The only trouble was that they were not paid overtime at the rate of time and a luarter for work in excess of eight lours, Mr Tonks .said that in view of the mtbreak of Influenza the only other tiling the company could have done was to take on other hands. It was not easy to take on casual labourers for a illi,ft or even for a week, and the result would therefore have been that the sick men would have had to be discharged in order that the men could get what they were seeking —permanent employment What the men in question did was to work twelve hours, and they received die pay of the men who were sick. The company derived no benefit. They paid for three men's work to two men. It had been a recognised thing for a man to take a sick mate's shift in this way. They received his pay and the result was that the place was kept open for the sick man. His Honour said that before deciding on the case the court should have some information as to the practice, and he directed the parties to confer with a view to arriving at some agreement as to the practice on the point raised, and to report to the Court, The case was acordingly ordered to stand down. EI TTI BBTJTE. Among those cited to appear before the Arbitration Court to-day were R. .Salmon and Son, butchers, and F. R. Bust, secretary of the Slaughtermen's Union, the former being charged with having committed a breach of the butchers' award in that they employed Bust at less than the minimum wage, and the latter with having been a party to it, in that he accepted less. The Court held that breaches had been committed, but under a misapprehension. The Court merely recorded the breaches, ordering respondents to pay costs.