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

ARBITRATION COURT.

WEDNEsaay, April 15. Before His Hor,or Judge Cooper and Messrs S. Brown and R. Slater.

New Plymouth Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joineis v. TiieTar*naki Mas'or Builders Ass ciatioi, tbe New Plymouth Sash and Door Oom pauy, Henry Brown and Company, and non-associated builders.

This was a cage ia whiih the carpenters asid joiners wished to secure the adoption of a new code of woik rules. Mr A. Kosatr, of Auckland, and with him Mr J, Smith, cirpentor, o | New Plymouth, appeared ia suppo:t.j Mr N. J. King, of St:atfoid, Pr of tbe Master Buliars Association,' and with hira Messes 0, E. Bellr.ng r and W. F. Bro king, appeired for th Builders, Mr Snowbi 1 for the Sas-hano Door Fac'ory, and Mr Ahier for Henr> Brown and Company. A large number of builders and employees were in Court.

Bsfore proceeding with the matter, His Honor said the paioters dispute would bs taken on Thurs lay, and the breaches of the award and an application to j )iu the Egmontßoofc Factoij with thi Bootmaker.,' Union on Friday. Mr opened his cas?, and said there were two union", a local ona and tha branch of the New Zailand Union, "ud th y were ia acco d. The übjec of the application to the Court w s to f,et sealed wages and hou s, Thr-y claimed Is 4|d an hour for 47 h a>.id wanted tho time of starting and knocking ofl' fixed for summ'.r a-'d winter, wages to be paid weekly and within fifteen miuutes after knocking off time. He called Edward Sparrow. Mr Be'lringer wis'ned to object that there was no dispute, but his Honor said he would hive aa opportunity later on.

E Iwßrd Sparrow then gave evidence of his hours of labour, and wag's piid. Ha cotmd.red tha demands fair and reisjnable. Thought over three miles shou'd be considered country work. Thought apprent:c s should be indentured. Boy labour and incompetent labour was woree in New Plymouth, than anywhere he bad been. Th* cost of living was higher here than Dunedin.

By Mr Bellringer: The membership of his union was SJO to 25. W. Foxaroft, carpenter, working for Mr G. Cliff for Is 3d par Lour, was secretary of the UnioD. It had 27 members, Thought demands very reasonable. Had no experience outside New Plymouth, Only one entry had been made iu the vacant b jok thi« year, and tne last year, this showed there w. s plenty of work. Thought boys should be apprenticed, and preference given to unionists. To Mr Bellringer: Had no knowledge of any demands being made for an increase of wages. To Mr Kicg : Knew nothing of the .state of things at Stratford. Did not | know if any men were out of work there.

Re-examineJ : Men have gone trora here to Wanganui because the wages are higher there. William Mayne, member cf the Wanganui union, said the award there was Is 3d, but the masters gave Is 4d. Two m'mbcrs of the Taranaki branch had gone to Wanganui. John Smith, in the employ of Boon Bros., slid he had bad 26 years experience at the trade. Got lis par day, Consdered the work as good here as auywhere. The firm made is own joinery. Did" not think any difference was made in the wages of joiners. Thought tho demands fair. To Hrs Honor: Was foreman, and had 27 men under him. There is lots of work, but more man to do it than there was 12 months ngo, Considared there was. a good future before (In workers. Tho e-cablishment of workmens' homes meant the erection of at least 60 cottager within two years to comply with the couditious. To Mr Ros-er: Was a married man with four children, Leirned from his wife that groceries were dearer here tban elsewhi'iM, Had heard builders comp'ain if t he incompetent worker, and wish to reduce them. Considered boys should bj apprenticed, as io was batter fjr both master and man, and j turneymen took tome pains to teach them when they were indentured, otherwise they never knew how long they would stop, and did not bother with them. To Mr Brooking: Ago id man often hid to imko way for the improver. If the number of improvers were reduced he considered it would ba better all round. |

To Mr Bellringer: Could not say whit was the proportion of good and bad tradesmen, or what effect on the amount of work done a lise in wages would have.

To l;be Judge: Consider 10s 61 a day a fair wage. To Mr King: Considered Union men should have preference. Knew nothing about the Stratford men. Was 11 os aware there w-.ts nothing doing at Stratford or Eltbam.

F. Hartnell, working as a joiner for B jou Brothers for 10a per day, said he w&s secretary to the local Society. .[: had 17 memb >rs ; when first fo/med it had 40. The subscription was 3d per weuk. The entrance fee was Is, bat that pud a month's subscription in advance. The condition of'membership is honesty aud sobriety. Worked for his present employers six or eaveri years. Could not s<vd much out of his wages. Was paid by cheque. Kn*w he could obj' ct if he wishel. Got his cheque after banking hours on Satu - day. Had no trouble to change it, but cash would be a little easier. To Mr Bullringer : Members of the Union were satisfied with present, wages if they cou'd not got more. Did not know of any of them refusing to on the demands. Did not know rents bad come down.

To the Court: IV rent of a Ave room cotrajje is lis to 12s a week.

To Mr King : Did not know of any man leaving for want of work. Had heard things were slack at Stratford and Eltham.

Tuomns Gtrin gave similar evidence, in th« course of which his Honor, Mr Justice Coop r, siid he thought it a pi-v the go:d otfican of the Conciliation Boaid had not be~-n sought. From what he could see the matter might have been Bittbd. Hp thought it a pity report was not mov< often made t.j the Conciliation Boird, ns many points could be hauiMon d out and better understanding arrived at. Mr Ross»r said the difficul y was che Board could not enforce its decision!--, and bo'.h sides could not get all th'y wanted. Witness Gurin: Considered there was u gcod deal of dissatisfaction at the rate of wngen, and the filling off in mtm'.icrehip of the Union was due to hs long wait for the award, which disheartened ths men.

Robert Roberts, James Shenrjr, 11. W, Young, Jehu Steves son, H, Mad-

der, F. Dense, Louia Callaghan and J«mes Martin all gave similar eri-; dence, af er which the Court adjourned for lunch.

On rchUtning Mr Roseer went into the bos and said during the luncbe n hour, he had got pi ices of various i.rt cles of houNi-huld us>, which he put in. The l «.te .-'eciet ivy and Treasurer, at tho timti the dispute wan filed,

sured him a demand for a rise in > a#es had benn re mt-d. I To Mr Bellrii ger: Got hi* price Llist from Wbituker only, To Mr King : Could not give the names of any employer who had refused a rise of w g- s, Mr Bellringer on behalf of the employers, contended th>re was no dispute, and tin wiiges pad were fixed by agie ment batween ;he pirties. The Court hold that the demand fi'-vd constituted a dispute, unless it was accepted by tlu employer?. Mr B llringer then went through tl e c'auses of the new rul s, acd the result: df a little give and take wis that everything was agreed to, bar tbe rate "f wages, i'nd tho question of p-*e-f tence to Unionists.

His Honor said thfie was alegil disput ', aud as the Court was here, it ■vast bes f . that an award be mad<-, find the mat'er set'led on all the other poit.ts, with tuodificat'ors to sui' the ■O alily. The Gisb Tne awnd was «oceptcd by both sides, and the Couit said it would h ar evidence on thi disputed c'.-ms s. Mr Bellringer Cilled rhe followi'g witnesses NathanM John Kingj(B!ratforii), Presid n" of ihe Taiauaki Builderh' i; Albert A. Pikett, G. Cliff, L. Bulio*, E. Snowbill (Secretary of the Hash aud Door Company), C.-Ahic<r (Henry Brown and Co.). The evidence, which was corro'iorutive, was to theeff ct thit the tmp'oyers had never heard of tho Socisty'n rules until after the dispute was filed, and that so far as tLey knew their men were s ttisfied with present wages. That the Union comprised only a very email portion of the employees. Tha> work was now slack and an increase of wages nould be injurious to both employees and employers, as in consequence of tbe rise in the price of timber and tbe lowoessof rents buildingoperations would be curtailed, as people were h'liiog back in the hope of reduced prices. That a rise in wages in one trade was always followed by a levelling-up process in other kindred trades. Toat the cost of living in tbe Taratiaki district was about tbe stime as elsewhere. That preference of employment should not be given to uoinnis's. That the only tes 1- . of a man's competency was the quility of his work. That 10j a d*y or Is 3d iour was a good wage. That th« building trade had f illeu off considerably of late. That those who started the agitition for increased wages were 'he inferior met), Mr 0 iff' stating tba» from his expemtce the leaders of the Unionists were the worst men he employed. With regard to tho question of prefeten"e of smp'oymenc for (Juion inec, his Honor stated tbat the piint only wh»n tin capacity cf Unionists and con-Ufjionists was tqual. On behalf of tbe Builders' Association Mr Btllricger submitted that the evidence showed tbat 10s a day was a a fair and equitable remuneration, and that an increase would be detrimental and injurious to employers and employe: s. Pugt reh ions between masters and men had been most satisfactory, and there had been no evidence of grievance?. He asked the Court to fix tbe minimum wage for competent mer at Is 31 per tour. Considering that the Uuion sts wei e so few be submitted th it preference should not be given to them. These were the only points iu dispute, The employers desire was ti have amicable arrangements wi:h th' men.

Mr Hoaser repli d. Lie contended there wan no clause in the Act that compelled a conference between em ployeis and employed, lie submitted if, had been Bhown living was dtarei her* than elsewhere, and quoted priceof meat, bread, butter, etc., rs cisefin point. He had never found ai extra Id psr hour f-top building 01 create a slackness, lie did no: env* the buillers their but claimed the employees should share in ic. He chimed for joiners in thi shops the same rate at least bs p lid t< c-.rpenters. He dwelt at length on th j question of incompetent men and apprentices. His Honor intimated the award would be delivered on Saturday morning.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19030416.2.9

Bibliographic details

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 92, 16 April 1903, Page 2

Word Count
1,881

ARBITRATION COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 92, 16 April 1903, Page 2

ARBITRATION COURT. Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 92, 16 April 1903, Page 2