Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NEW DOMINION AWARD

Request By Builders’ Labourers (P.A.) WELLINGTON, November 13. The hearing of the application by the New Zealand Builders’, Contractors and General Labourers’ Union for a new Dominion award was resumed in the Court of Arbitration at Wellington tO Mr P Butler, secretary of the appellant union, asked the Court to award some tangible minimum guaranteed wage other than an hourly basis. The union asked for either daily hiring and firing or a guaranteed number of working hours or guaranteed wages each week. This was the practice in Great Britain on major works and particularly in works arising from the effects of the war. What Great Britain could do under war" conditions he contended New Zealand could do under comparatively peaceful conditions. With the exception of the cost of living bonus and the Otago award in 1937, members of the union had had no increase in wages since 1926. From the Court in 1924 they received increases from 1/9 to 1/10. They received no beneficial improvements in other conditions from the Court till 1939, when the Court made a Id an hour increase in the rate for men handling or mixing concrete. In 1939 the Court gave the workers 6d a day extra for working in wet places, but in the existing Otago award there was already a rate of l|d an hour extra for this work.

Daniel Jeremiah Keane, organizer for the Wellington branch of the Labourers’ Union, said he estimated that builders’ labourers lost on an average a day a week through wet weather. He had worked with men on building jobs when they were drenched to the skin. The tendency was to keep working as long as possible in the rain. Mr Justice Tyndall: My experience has been just the opposite. Cross-examined by Mr W. J. Mountjoy (employers’ advocate), the witness said that builders’ labourers came and went frequently on jobs. Very few builders’ labourers were employed regularly wet or fine. The hearing will be continued tomorrow, when Mr Mountjoy will present the case for the employers.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19411114.2.91

Bibliographic details

Southland Times, Issue 24592, 14 November 1941, Page 6

Word Count
342

NEW DOMINION AWARD Southland Times, Issue 24592, 14 November 1941, Page 6

NEW DOMINION AWARD Southland Times, Issue 24592, 14 November 1941, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert