CONTRACTING IN MINES.

Observer, Volume XXIII, Issue 4, 11 October 1902, Page 2

CONTRACTING IN MINES.

A Change in the Law

ONE of the strongest fights made by the miners when their case

was before the Arbitration Court was against the contract system. They argued that contracting in a mine was not on a parallel with contracting for the building of a house, because the carpenter knew exactly what his materials and labour would cost, while the miner was unable to see a foot into the ground ahead of him, and therefore couldn't tell when it would change to difficult country. Consequently, they argued that contracting underground was a speculation, and unmoral, and ought to be abolished in favour of the day wages system.

But they could not persuade the Court to take the same view of the matter, beeaose to veto contracting would be to create a revolutionary change in the country, and the system was consequently maintained. But the miners were not satisfied. Before the dispute, the Waibi and other big mine* were worked on the day wages system. After the award, contracting in the larger mines became -general, to the manifest disadvantage of the men, who are necessarily better off with steady work than with occasional con tracts. Hence, the discontent concerning the contracting system has continued.

As a last resort, the Government was appealed to, and, the elections being imminent, the appeal was not wholly in vain. In the last hours of the session, a clause was inserted in the Mining Bill giving the miners a great deal of what they wanted, though not by any means all. So far as the mines fully manned were concerned, the Government had no power over them, but they had great power over the mines seeking to work with^a lesser number of men. Therefore, it has been provided that where a mine seeks partial protection, and the right of working with fewer men, the whole of these shall be wages men.

In a word, this stops contracting in all partially-protected mines, and, as a natural consequence, in nearly- all the mines on the peninsula. Of course, it does not touch the Waihi, Crown, and perhaps two or three other mines. But there are many others, not fully manned, that have been in the habit of doing their work by contract, the men employed being reckoned as hands in the mine. These companies may still let work on contract, but they must also employ on wages the full number of men provided for in their protection certificate. This will suit the miners as far as it goes, but it won't find much favour with either directors or shareholders. Some of the returning members hold that the clause in question does net affect contracts, and is intended only to provide that tributers shall not count as hands employed in the mine. The clause as telegraphed, however, certainly does not read that way.