CONFERENCE DEADLOCK

Taranaki Daily News, 22 August 1930, Page 4

CONFERENCE DEADLOCK

IRON. TRADES DISPUTE. FACTOR OF FEMALE LABOUR. A deadlock was reached at a sitting of the Conciliation Council at Christchurch on Tuesday at which the employers in the ironworks industry -submitted proposals for important amendments to the award covering the manufacturing section of the trade. Representatives of both sides were present from the four main centres and were presided over by Mr. W. H. Haggcr, conciliation commissioner. The sitting lasted three hours. The employers asked that the award be amended by the addition of four new clauses. The first of these provided for a comprehensive classification of the employees into three grades, that female workers- might bo employed under th conditions laid down in the award for male workers, subject to special provisions, and that two or more shifts may be worked. Mr. T. O. Bishop said the employers were not seeking to amend the award in any spirit of wanton mischief. They were not- endeavouring to displace skilled male workers by apprentices, unskilled boys and female workers, but were seeking to obtain conditions which would render possible the manufacture of certain commodities and maintain that of others which were being earned on with increasing difficulties. The general position of New Zealand had a great deal of bearing. ‘ on the matter. The national income, had been reduced and the costs of manufacture for use within the Dominion must be reduced.

The empl yers’ proposals, said Mr. Bishop, meant .a dilution of labour, the apportionment of work between skilled, .semi-skilled and unskilled workers, and the employment in certain spheres of female labour. He asked the representatives of the unions if they were prepared to discuss the proposals. The employers —ere prepared to consider any suggestions advanced by the other side. Mr. R. F. Barter said there was no feeling of hostility on his side, but he w r as not prepared to consider the application to amend the award. His siue was against the employment of female labour and other clauses in the proI posals, but was prepared to discuss the original claims made in 1928, when the present award was filed. Mr. Bishop: What would be the object of i. cussing those again? What you have said ma&es the position look rather hopel -s. Would you be prepared to consider any proposals in the direction of effecting a reduction in costs to the employers? Mr. Barter;. Not by a reduction in wages. W > arc prepared to discuss any new matters you have to bring forward. Mr. Bishop: That would be a waste of time. I am greatly disappointed. The commissi one’ said that in view of the unions’ direct refusals to discuss the proposals he would ask Mr. Barter if he would discuss the employment of boys and women. Mr. Barter: No, because that' is dilution of labour. Mr. Dagger: Well, may I suggest that if you are relying on the fact that an award may not be amended before. it has run its term, unless the parties agree, that may not be the ease in regard to entirely new claims? Mr. Barter said the Arbitration Court had already ruled out the employers’ application on the ground that it was not an amendment at all. Mr. Bishop said he did not mind the matter going to the Court, but it would delay the employers from putting their house in order. Mr. Cameron said he was glad to sec that the unions were opposing the importation of t >p-dressers. A large number- had been imported in the last six ’month* l from Sweden. France aixd' Gcr-

many. In France the daily wage for unskilled labour in the industry was ss; in Germany it was 8d and in New Ze-’’and 17s. If something were not done to’ass : -t the farm implement-mak-j ing industry so’ e of the manufacturers would have to go out of business. After the assessors had sat in silence for a minute or two Mr. Warner said the union assessors were prepared to discuss proposals for the new award to be made in a year’s time. Mr. Bishop: That is a bit of camouflage. Mr. Hagger said there seemed to be very little chance of making headway. Mr. Barter asked if. the employers had a schedule of wages paid in the industry and by . their foreign' competitors. Mr. Bishop: We have .a lot of information which we are not prepared to place before the council while you refuse to discuss our proposals. You are refusing to do the job for which the council was ppointed. I very reluctantly move that this council be terminated and that this dispute b - referred back to the Arbitration .Hour t with no recommendation. Mr. Barter seconded the motion. He said the unions would not accept all the responsibility for the deadlock. “We are prepared to discuss the original claims/' he added. ■ Mr. Bishop: You know you are saying that with your tongue in- your - cheek. The chairman asked for a direction whether the council should "adjourn until , the afternoon or. whether-the sitshould . conclude. Mr. Barter - said ho could, not go back on his previous l statement and the chairman declared the sitting at an end. , \ ■ 1 ■