FARM LABOURERS.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13679, 22 August 1908, Page 5

FARM LABOURERS.

j ARBITRATION COURT'S JUDGMENT. NO AWARD MADE'FOR FARM HANDS. LABOUR MEMBER'S DTSSENT. Per Press Association. DUNEDIN, August 21. Mr Justice Sim, in delivering judgment in the Canterbury farm labourers' dispute, said that the Court had discretion, whether or not to make an award, but declined to do so in the present ease. It appeared to the Court • that, in dealing with farm labourer generally, the Onion had failed to prove the existence of any substantial grievance or abuse that would justify the interference of the Court with the whole farming industry of Canterbury. It further appeared to be quite impracticable to fix any definite hours for the daily work of a general farm hand without altering materially the system under which farming is carried on at the present time. The Court wits satisfied that it was impracticable, to lis; what would be a fair minimum wage for a farm hand. If the minimum weie fixed low, at for example, 20s weekly, the result, might be to bring down wages, which was an undesirable result. If the minimum were fixed at 25s or 27s 6d a week, a considerable .burden would be thrown on the farming industry, and increase the cost of farming by many thousands of pounds. The effect of any such increase in wages would be to discourage the employment of labour, and induce farmers to avoid grain-growing and other operations involving the employment of labour. It had not been proved that men were, being sweated. They were provided with food and shelter, and if the pecuniary wage were small it might be a case where, they were riot worth more to a farmer and' they might have a difficulty in earning a living at any other work. The judgment proceeds: " The conclusion we have come to is that it is not practicable to make an award fixing the hours of work and wages for general farm, hands without altering seriously the conditions under which farming is now carried on. If a strong case had been made out for interference, the Court might have felt compelled to make an award, and attempt to regulate the hours of work and wages of general farm hands. Such a case, however, was not made out, and the Court js thus relieved of the necessity of making a perilous attempt to regulate by award the whole farming interest of the Dominion." There seemed to be no necessity for interference by the Court on behalf of those engaged in harvest work. Mr McCullough, the workers representative, dissents from the judgment. He js strongly of opinion that grounds exist which justify and render necessary the interfernace of the Court, and that it is possible to make a workable award on the subject. As to the shepherds, musterers, and packers, an award was made between the Union and sheep-owners, fixing the minimum wage for musterers at the rate fixed . under; the Otago and Southland award of this year, and! fixing those for packers employed in connection with mustering at 30s a week. This award only applies to workers engaged specially as musterers r.r packers. Any regular farm or station hand assisting in mustering or employed in packing, will not come within the scope of the award. The Court was not satisfied that there was any necessity to make an award dealing with shepherds' wages. The. question, of a living wage did not arise in the case of shepherds. MR J. McCULLOUGH'S PROTEST. CHRTSTOHURCH, August, 21. Mr J. A. McCullough, the workers representative on the Arbitration Court, when interviewed by a reporter stated that he most strongly dissented from the findujl! of .'.the Court-arid in the. following statement to the president, in Dunedin. The president, however, refused to embody this protest in the Court's finding merely recording the fact that Mr McCullough had strongly dissented. Mr McCulloi!t;5 r s protest reads as follows :—"Dunetfin, 20th August, 1908, re Canterbury farm workers' dispute: Though it may be iisual and customary . for a member of the Court when desiring to give a minority report on any matter tipon which he feels lie cannot conscientiously support the finding of the majority, to simply record his disagreement, yet I feel that in respect to the judgment given in connection with the Canterbury Agricultural Labourers' Dispute it is not only essential that I should emphatically and definitely protest against the finding in question, but as the representative of the workers on this industrial tribunal I should be wanting in my duty towards those who have placed me in this position were I do allow this important decision to be dealt with in the manner it has been, without making public' the reasons that have induced ma' to protest. By a majority the Court has adduced a number of reasons why an award in connection with the farming industry should not be made. While I have no desire to suggest that the Court in coming to this decision has been prompted by any -ulterior or unworthy motives, yet I feel confident that not ■ one of the reasons adduced, nor all of them combined, are sufficient to justify the- Court in their refusal to make an award, nor has this particular case had in my opinion mcte.l out to it that justice which it has merited. To be plain I am forced to say that 'lie Court has- by its pronouncement succeeded in disposing temporarily of an important and responsible du'y ly sheltering behind a number of exaggerated and imaginary arguments, i ait have »i c no form or another been mod* »•••« of "r.y the farmers for the purpose of obtaining theii object. P'fforts and not arguments of this character have been in vogue <-ver sir.ee the first industrial union of workers attempted to obtain better working conditions. Repetition has added ■* nothing to their value. I regret very much that I should be compelled to express my views in this manner and still more that t here should be the necessity for my doing so: but so far as I am perscnally concerned I have no hesitation- in stating that. I honestly believe that though the dispute in question presented many difficulties they could have been surmounted by the Court and ought to have been surfnbunted. It is quite probable that the Court would not have succeeded in giving general satisfaction in all directions ; yet I am convinced that it was quite within, its power, and, therefore, within its duty to have drafted or «r----ranged an award that would have arsisted in a very material degree towards removing many of the anomalies and hardships towards individual workers which undoubtedly exist in the farming industry at the present time; and that the accomplishment of this duty would not have been the cause of bringing about the disastrous results foreshadowed by the Courtin its deliverance. Further, it appears to m© to be a most extraordinary and despotic proceeding to say that the largest tssction of the workers in this Dominion should be denied the right to have the conditions of their livelihood, their wages and hours of labour fixed by means of that legislation which' has been expressly provided for this very purpose. In conclusion, I express the hope that those who have it in their power to prevent a,recurrence of what I conceive to be a miscarriage ofjustice, will use that power to obviate and remove a disability thafc can only be regarded by the workers) as a hindrance to their aspirations and to their. futureprosperity. ' (Sighed) J. A. McCullough,

workers' representative, 'Arbitration Com I." fu reply io a question from the reporter .Mr McCullough said thai, .owing to', his official position lie must, refrain from .saving a good many things to the farm workem, that he would otherwise have said. He would, however, express the hope thai, they would not he discouraged by this temporary rebuff, bub that, they "would rather see in it- an additional reason-.for more complete organisation,. 150 that,th« victories of (he future would wipe out all memory of the defeats of the past.. MUSTERERS AND PACKERS. TERMS OF THE AWARD. ' CHRTSTCHURCH, August 21. • The following award has been filed with ths Clerk of Awards, in the matter of.au industrial'dispute between the Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Labourers' Industrial' Union of Workers and .the Canterbury Sheepowners' Industrial Union' of Employaro:— (1) —Wages of musterers and packers: (a) Musterers when employed'to- muster sheep for any purposes shall bo. paid''riot less than 10s per day if engaged- fcfr.-lest than a w-:x-k and £2 2s per week if engaged for a week or more, with an' additional payment, in the last-mentioned case. of 10s for any v Sunday on which any musterer shall be> required to do any work. Snow-raking shall lie/ paid not less than 10s per day while men are engaged in such work, (b) Packers employed in connection with mustering shall be paid nor, less than £1 10s per week. (2) —Youths may be employed' at. not, less than the following rates in addition to board and lodgings:—For the first years 17s 6d per week, for the second year £1 2s 6d per week: the proportion, of learners to adult musterers shall be not, more than one to four or fraction rf the first four.

(3) —Sleepingaccommodation : In all cases where it.is reasonably practicable musterers and packers shall be provided, by employers with good dry sleeping accommodation on the hills and provision made for the protection of all. bedding from wet during transit and while in use. (4) —Food of good quality (includi'ng butter) shall be supplied to musterers and packers by the employers; (5) —Matters in dispute:—lf any question shall arise in connection with the provisions of tins award, or as to any matter not, provided for by this award, such qxiestions shall be, settled by agreement between the particular employer concerned and the local representative of the Union appointed for that purpose, and in default of any such agreement the question shall be determined by.the Stipendiary Magistrate of the district in which the same shall have arisen; • pending the settlement of any such question ■work shall go on as usual and the seiftiementor decision may be made to operaio retrospectively. ' • . (6) —Employers shall not in the engagement or dismissal of their workers ...discriminate against members of fhei Union, nor in the conduct of their business drt anything for the purpose of injuring rhe Union, whether directly or indirectly. (7) —When-.the members of the .Union and non-members are employed together, there shall be no distinction between them and both shall work together in harmony and under the same conditions and shall re ccive eqti al pay for equal work. ■ • ! , . • (8) —Exemption of , regular farm arid station hands: The provisions of .thins award shall not. apply to any worker who. is employed regularly as a farm, or station hand, and who assists in mustering or who does packing for musterers. (9) —This award shall come into force on the Ist day of -September, 1908, and shall continue in force until tha Ist day of May, 1910. . ■ V ;. ..:-.'