TEST CASE

Southland Times, Issue 20044, 4 December 1926, Page 7

TEST CASE

COALMINERS’ WAGES ALLEGED ALTERED CONDITIONS PLAINTIFFS NONSUITED (Per United Press Association.) Auckland, December 3. A case of wide application concerning coal miners’ wages as affected by the candle-power of their electric safety lamp® was heard in the Supreme Court. As the result, a test claim against a mining company for arrears of additional wages was dismissed. John and Joseph Redfern, miners of Huntly, sued the Taupiri Coal Miners, LtaL for £9O 3/9, representing 3d a ton on coal hewn by them jointly in the Rotowaro mine. The case was heard by Mr Justice Adams. Mr O’Regan appeared for plaintiffs and Mr West for the company. The claim was made under clause 33 of the award. This clause provides that there shall be an addition to the hewing rate if in the event qf changes in the working conditions in a mine, the men are required to work with lamps of less than one candlepower. Mr O’Regan stated that when the award came into force the “Oldham” safety lamp had been in use for twelve months. It was an electric lamp with a self-contained storage battery and was still used in the mine. Both the company and the men had assumed that it was of one candle-power and accordingly from its introduction the lower hewing rate was paid. The lamp had been approved by the Home Office in England and the Mines Department in New Zealand and was stated by its makers to be of one candle-power. It was now alleged that tests made by Professor P. H. Powell, director of the School of Engineering at Canterbury College upon an “Oldham” lamp from Westport, showed that the lamp was of less than one candle-power. Plaintiffs, who, according to the usual procedure, worked as a pair, were claiming arrears at 3d a ton from the introduction of the lamps. Thomas Hall, secretary of the Rotowaro Miners’ Union, said he had been present as a delegate when the terms of the award had been agreed to. He had then considered that a one candle-power lamp meant a lamp giving the same amount of light as a tallow candle. John Lock, secretary of the Millerton Miners’ Union and agent for the Rotowaro Union at the conference with the company, said there had been no agreement about any method of testing the power of lamps. Professor Powell stated he had Rested an “Oldham” lamp in the condition in which he received it. He had no instructions regarding the method of testing and having regard to the purpose for which the lamp was used. He ascertained the mean horizontal candle-power by what was known as the revolving test. This gave six-tenths of candle-power for eight hours. Under a stationary test, however, the lamp maintained one candle-power for the same period. There were at least four methods of calculating the candle-power of a lamp, but the custom was to use that which was reasonable considering the purpose for which the lamp was used. Mr West moved for a non-suit on the grounds (a) That plaintiffs to establish any claim for a higher rate must show that they had hewn a definite quantity of coal, using lamps of less thsn one candle-power. (b) That the evidence did not show that the lamps used in the Rotowaro mine were of less than one candle-power. (c) That the clause in the award on which the claim was based had no effect in this instance, seeing that the conditions in the mine had not changed since the award, the same lamp being in use as in 1923. Counsel said that Professor Powell’s test had been made upon a lamp from another mine. There was no evidence about ite condition when tested though the age and the condition of the storage battery and bulb were essential factors. Mr O’Regan remarked that the union had been refused a test by the company. His Honour interrupted the argument, stating that plaintiffs must be non-suited. They had failed to produce evidence that the lamps used in the mine were of less than one candle-power within the meaning of the award. The award did not specify any method of determining candle-power and plaintiffs were not entitled to select a method which gave the result in their favour.