FARM LABOURERS' CLAIMS.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIC, Issue 13460, 5 December 1907, Page 6

FARM LABOURERS' CLAIMS.

CONCILIATION BOARD

The Board lesumed its sitting (in the Sophia Street Hall) at 10 a.m. P. J. Keane, recalled, and examined by Mr Acland, said tie newspaper report of his address at Pleasant Point, misrepresented him on one point. It stated that he said the demands"were absurd. He was reported lower down to have said that the demands were not so absurd as' the farmers made them out to be. He wrote (in reply to a correspondent) that they were not so absurd or outrageous as they had been made out to be. Mr Acland read this and said there was not much in it disagreeing with the newspaper report. The witness admitted that the report was correct to all intents and purposes. Mr Acland then quoted the report. of the address, which said the half-holiday and holiday in May were absurd. Witness said he would approve of a Saturday halfholiday, with overtime pay for it. (Mr Acland: It's more,.money you are after then?) No, he would rather have the holiday. Mr Acland cross-examined on what he asserted was the impracticability of some of the-demands. Mr Thorn suggested that it was not the duty of the witness to explain how the demands would work, but to give, facts . Mr Acland said* the Union made demands, and it was for ,them to show how the new wachinery "would work.

The chairman said that was his idea too. He had thought, however, that a good deal of time had been wasted ihe day before in the cress-examination by Mr Jones of the witness who had never attended a Union meeting, about the tactics and ethics of the Union; -but he did not interfere then. He would say now that the time of the Board should not b# taken up in the cross-examination oi witnesses . who knew nothing. But this witness being an officer 01 the "Union, the case was different, and the line of crossexamination was justifiable. Mr Thorn interposed that the witnesses should be asked lor facts, not theories.

Mr Acland replied that the Union had made demands and it was for them to show, through their witnesses, or otherwise, that their demands were workable. The chairman agreed that that was the case-

Mr Acland set forth the difficulty he, as an employer, would be put to, if he had to. refer to a Union "employment book" kept at Geraldine, whenever he wanted a man for a day's work. * Witness: The employers refused to confer over the matter, the workers then had to appeal to the Board, and it wss for the Board to say whether they were •workable or not. Mr Thorn commenced a re-examination ■with questions, regarding ploughing, and went on to ask about ploughing with a traction enginel Mr Acland remarked" that there was nothing in the Semand about this kind of work, and the, chairman said it was not before the Board at all.

Another discussion took place over a statement made by Mr Evans, the previous evening, that the Union demands ■would reduce the ploughmen's jtime by 29 per cent. Mr Thorn said he had made the calculation and it was not more than 134 per cent. Mr Evans persisted in his statement, and said that he -would prove by ; and by that, emitting harvest tim« t the ' demands meant a loss of an hour a day all the year round, if the hours asked for -were granted, and Mr Thorn had omitted to reckon that loss. (The problem ■was therefore not ye: completely solved). Witness, to Mr Thorn, said a man. who used a three-furrow plough must' do 50 per cent .moie work, and it wcs therefore worth more. He did not know any business in which the men worked such long ' hours as ploughmen, except bushmen.

The witness was further re-examined about the holiday question, and by Mr Kennedy about the conditions of ploughing and threshing J Witness said there was a good deal of difference, chiefly in the employers. One man thought a great deal of his horses, and a ploughman had to look after them as carefully as if he were a stud-groom, while another man with a rough team did not care. He had never yet driven a team 8 hours a day "in tight chains." The actual ploughing did nob occupy 8 hours, but ploughmen had to put in more time looking after the horses. Mr Smith asked some questions about chaff-cutting conditions. To Mr Sheat: Did not object to shearing by contract, because the price was fixed; in harvest contracts it was not. The shearer who knew what he could do, knew what he could make, the stooker could~not know, crops varied so much; and if a price was fixed it would have to be a minimum.

To Mr Broadhead: The Union secretary would be able to go about and learn the value of men as workers, and the Union should be consulted about granting "permits."

To Mr Rusbridge: There were not many swaggers about now. He saw one that morning, the first for two years. He 'admitted that some mien were worth more than others. Saw no difficulty in a farmer. getting men through a bureau for harvest, a good fanner would know when his harvest would be ready, and would prepare for it. He did not consider shearing by the 100 at a fixed rate was the same system ds contract- stooking with cutting prices. To Mr Whiting: It was quite possible

to work 'BS hours a day in -winter by shortening the dinner hour. George Hamilton, part owner of Clayton Station, called by Mr Acland, said he, had managed the place for 26 years. Had also had experience with sheep in Queensland. The proposed new conditions would be most harassing, but there was said to be nothing impossible. Wages had increased in recent years. Witness's head shepherd got £l2O a year. Had had him for 20 years and ueed to pay him £BO a year. It was impossible to fix a rate for head shepherds; their skill and duties differed so much. His own head shepherd had eight men under nim, and he had power 10 dismiss a. man, though he had never done so without reference to witness. One cculd not tell what a -shepherd was worth till he had tried him; some young fellows ' were good shepherds. Under shepherds got £7O and found; all were found. Plain shepherds were very little good on the hills. Did not know what a "casual shepherd" was. Put on extra men. at lambing, but these were experienced men, generally eettlers on Crown leaseholds in the neighbourhood, some of whom were themselves employers. Had had shesp - smothered .by young, inexperienced men. Did not do much packing. The men did the cooki.ig when mustering, and they got about the Fame as at the station, except puddings. They took out whatever they pleased. Camp accommodation had been much improved, hute had built- with bunks —quite as good as those supplied by the Government for tourists at Mount Cook. The packman got- 25s a week. If they had to pay £3 that would be the same as the musterers got, and there would be great competition'for the job. Did not. agreethat food should he taken ,to the huts in advance. -It would become stale and be stolen, by swaggers. The only case he knew of men having to camp out in the snow. in tents was in IS9s—the year of the great snowstorm. Musterers' wage* had always been 10s a day, and'weekly wages had gone up in recent .years 5s a week. Had not had a complaint from the men about the wages, and if they had any complaints about the food they were not made to him. No single award could be fair as the hill, country differed so much. The last contract he let" was for skinning dead sheep; that was .in August and September last. Let some of .the contract work to his own men, who preferred it to working by the week. His men often approached him in the matter. Never limited food for dogs. Some swaggers came along for work and he had employed some of them. Stations could not l.ave s?t holidays. Shearing went on on Box >ing Day and New Year's Day. They were too far away from towns, and the holiday would be no use to them. If shearing at Christmas time, a number of sheep had to be put in the shed on Christmas Eve, as the heavy dew prevented jiheep that had been uncovered from being shorn until 11 a.m. The same thing had to be done en a Sunday afternoon. Some of the men took, holidays, others went off for an odd day. Some of the men had no homes and did not care about going from the place. In regard to musterers there were occasions when no work could be don© on account of fog, and rain also meant thick weather. Mustering was hot dangerous work. He did not know of a single accident in connection with it- "Snow raking" was making tracks with a narrow plough, and the sheep were driven down th:se to sunny slopes. The men were weH acquainted with the condition of the snow. Had cautioned them not to go near deep snow. A number of incompetents drifted into the country, decent men, but who were not worth more than £1 a week. It was no joy managing a run, and; life would not be worth living if no one but Unionists were to be employed. To Mr Sheat: . Always made a point of giving.a man' .a-meal; had never refused one. In Spring as many as 100 ; men called; some asked for work who wanted it, and some who did not, others asked only for a meal.

Mr Acland said he knew a station where one year 1500 swaggers called, and last vear*9oo called there. The Board then adjourned for lunch. When the Board resumed at 2 p.m., Mr Acland brought out some evidence regarding the importance of the stationcook—as every other cook—if the men were not satisfied with their food they would ba discontented generally. To Mr Kennedy: Witness's head shepherd acted as foreman at mustering; and received orders for the under shepherd. Not every station required a head shepherd at such a high wage. Knew men fit to manage 50C0 or 10.000 sheep whomj he would not trust with 30,000. £BO to £BS was enough for a head shepherd on a small station. The £92 asked for was a little excessive. That meant '* found" as well. His sheep were most of them merino?. The prices were always fluctuating. Sold last- year at an average of 4s, the previous year Is more; and come half-breds under 10s. Ten years ago the prices were about the same; five years ago about half as much again. Wool values had increased in the last 10 years, but not in the last four or five. Last year sold wool from 7d to 13£ d. The wages demanded would not be too high for the b-rr.t shepherds, but too high for the average. As" to supply of food to mustered, would leave the details to the employer. Believed they all supplied good and sufficient food. To lay down ration rat.es would not hurt, but would harass them. They would do right without being asked. But if any award wSn

made they might, as well put that in as some other things. Would not say that men should be paid for travelling to work, who lost a, day; but always did pay, and so did others." If a hard and fast rule were, made a limit of distance should be fixed. No one rule could be made for one man going 40 miles and for another going 5 miles. Did not think a man should be paid till he started to work, but custom decreed otherwise.

Mr Kennedy suggested that the musterers had- to keep their dogs at some cost for the rest of the year, and witness said they generally went droving. His own musterers were settlers, and it did 'not cost them much to keep their dogs.

Referring to the yarding of sheep and shearing on holidays, Mr Kennedy asked whether it would not be fair to pay double for this work as was the rule in town work. Witness said he did not think the men would look for it. Employers lived more with their men on stations, and the men would not let them yard the sheep themselves. To Mr Sheat: An hour at the outside would fill the shed. ■ Wibnefe, stated that he paid his cook 25s per week, 6s a week extra during mustering and poisoning (for baking bread for the camp) and. £3 a week during shearing. These were fair rates. There was no very hard and fast rule about 8 hours a day, but) the men probably

averaged 8 hours. Did not consider mustering on the hills to be particularly dangerous work; not more eo than working a plough. Did not think any man would apply for a " permit"; they generally thought they were worth as much as others, but they accepted ' less wages ■if .they could not get full They would not do so .if. there were ". a fixed award rat*. If he had to pay 27s 6d a week instead of 25s Jie would * probably try to do with fewer men. He. could often do without men that he kept on. To Mr Thorn: A .man'looking after 5000 sheep did nob need the same amount of experience as one "who had 15,000 to. look after; the latter would have more responsibility; both wojild require the same practical skill. The £92 was -rather high, for a head shepherd at starting. Could not say whether he would or would not reduce his head shepherd's wages if an award were made.'■"■ Should there not, be levelling down as well as levelling 1 up? The . "casual shepherd" was! brought up, and witness said that was a very good instance of the impossibility of' making an average award. - He employ:ed one man a specially good' man at ■ &% 15s a Week during lambing, : and another, a youth of 19,' who called himself ■a . shepherd, and did know somethihg''about ehesp, at £1 -a, week; aid; both v were worth their :, money. , Hows C could ; anaward; be niadei to fit these ; two men?

Mr Thorn, next turned -to the swagger, and obtained an estimate that..about 50 per cent of the callers- were employable, the others were, not. .;.'': He ; did hot think, a man' had to save very much now, tp; get. on a bit of land.? ■-'

To Mr • Smith : Snow-raking was very hard work. It) lasted a good while in 1895. - Had had :stores; stolen 'from hufe two or three times, and had. h4ard of other cases. ; Employed one farm hand at 25s a week- and a ; bonus :of £6. Let most of his agricultural /work by contract; ('Mr Smith said that 'the demand would not apply to such contracts). Mr Acland .• Knew 'of a ' case/ of 400 sheep being smothered by inexperienced yoking men. . '.'*"■' ■'•• \ '

Mi- Sbeab asked whether : an. award would, have any effect on.tha jnumber; of sheep raised, and. witness did not think it would, but it would a bad effect iipon some of the : employed by l©vel?iii£ down wages. • To Mr Broadhead: > If', tied down, W chapter and Verse it would destroy thepresent friendly relations' between master and insn." ~."." '.;'"■':

To Mr Whiting:' Mr Tripp on t.he'neat station worked very differently,: because his principal sheep were paddock steep,, Shough he had : ; some (high country too—--5030ft. in Blue Clayton ran up to 600Ofb. .. . . .-

H. D. Acland; 'part proprietor of Alt: Peel Station, about 100,000 acres,, carrying 36,€00i .to .38,000 sheep. Produced a return of wages paid for the. last 10 years to men in- different occupations on ■■the station: and wood-getter; found it .pralctajcaliy ismpossuble .< i\y g-qt boys, in either tbown or country; Their wages had been Taised from 10s to; 15s. There was always trouble with boys, and a man was employed at 255/a-week, and then a married couple was got. A groom was kept who began as a boy at lte and rose to 25s as he grew older; Married couples had been kept first at £7O and now -alb £94. Shepherds (fourj ; Oiadi been getting increases : of .wases since 1899 ; : from £55 to £65 and £6O to £7O; headshepherd from £BO to. £9O. r Thfe man who .took that place a year ago came; at £IOO a year; At the beginning of this year not a shepherd was getting I°ss than £65, three were getting £7O. The £65 man was a young fellow who had 'not much experience,- and. yet he was getting £5 a year jnore than experienced men got 10 years ago. Since 1899 the gardener's wages had gone up from 20?* to 3Cs' now, and the. station cook and baker's from 22s 6d to Jsos, with a bonus at shearing. The! wages! of pafckmen and general hands had gone up from 2Cs to '2ss since 1899, musterers got- from 35s in 1898, now £2, except .learners, (practically apprentices), 30s; Did not know how these would be provided for under an award. If a minimum wage were fixed the stations would only take the best of the learners. They had been yliid what ithey were worth, .and some of them were w>c>r4|h nothing. Head ishepherds were scarce now; so many had. set up,for themselves. Witness gave some instances of men who had laved money on 'stations; lots of them had money out. onmortgage, one he knew had; £6OO in" one

mortgage. He recommended 'members of the' Court to open, the "Euclycopedia of New Zealand" for Canterbury, and! open at "Ashburton" or "Geraldine," and they ■would be astonished .to find how many of the people described there were stated to have come out, "obtained employment at so and so'9/station," and • subsequently started for themselves and had prospered. Only the day before he met a man •whom, he had known as a employee: on a station years ago, and this man ! said he had let his. place and was going Home for a trip. The witness gave -, other instance from his own knowledisre. The statioDS must have good men, reliable men, who could be depended on to del what they were told to do without supervision, and they generally had got a good lob of men. The station packman was often a young fellow, who from packing learned mustering. Those who drew up ths demand could have had no practical experience. Evidence was, also given about .rhephsrd-s' and musterers' dogs. The witness said that most of the men made money out of their dogs. A half holiday would be no use to men on a station. What could they do but <sit in the hut? The necessities of the business depended very much on the weather. . Different men had different tastes in holidays. Some preferred the Grand National, , or the ■Christ-church Show, or the Timaru Show. The only new point the shearers' award touched' wars the manner in which. the question of "wet sheep" was to be settled. The conditions of shearing were practically the same in Canterbury find Australia, but wages (apart from shearers') were much lower in Australia. Witnere could not see how an award. could be made to suit farms and stations. Some of the (station hands were as much domestic eervants, as producers. There was no.

passing on increased cost of product to the consumer. If the award could fix the weather the runholders might look more favourably upon it. He had had a good deal of experience of swaggers, though Mount Peel station was on the way to nowhere. He knew that Mr Tripp had had as many as 1500 in one year, and 900 last year; as many as 60 on one night. Some of the swaggers had been on the road for years, until their faces and forms became" quite familiar to travellers. Now-a-days the swagger was usually referred to the cook, who probably required him to chop a bit of wood before giving him a feed. Under an award the cook probably would have to pay for that wood cutting; perhaps would have to send- to the Union to. see whether the man was a unionist or not. He could not see how an award could be made to fit the swagger. Some of them were young men, new chums, runaway sailors, green raw hands, who were determined to make a start and get on. He has also known men who had left town to take to country life, and some of them got on. Conditions' could not jbe. drawn up to suit the case of married couples, there were .so many different arrangements required. Mr Evans asked some questions,, and elicited the opinion that an award would injure the small man more than the big man. The latter could give up agriculture; and. rediuce the number of men employed. ' He believed that a great inany ' small farmers were having a hard enough time now; and if fathers had to pay their sons -wages it would injure the credit, of the small man. Many small men ' wera financed, "run" by companies and auctioneers, and with such.a handicap on the man they must look -for a larger cash margin, that is, the man must have saved a great deal more before he could make a start. ;'■' '■ »

The witnefs added :. that the evidence given at Christchurch by the manager of St. Helens .station; showed that up there higher wages were paid than in Fouth Canterbury; and it appeared that .higher Avages were paid on the hill stations than o,n'the plains. At 5 p.m. the Board adjourned till 10 this morning, when the sitting will be resumed in. the 'same hall.