Equal Pay For Women Sought In Eleven Industrial Awards

Wanganui Chronicle, 2 September 1950, Page 8

Equal Pay For Women Sought In Eleven Industrial Awards

WELLINGTON, Yesterday.—Equal pay with men for adult women workers covered by 11 award; was sought in applications presented to the Court of Arbitration today. Mr. P. Velvin, who appeared on behalf of the applicant unions, said the applications arose out of the Court’s interim general wage order of 10s 6d, granting a maximum increase of 7s to adult male workers and a maximum increase of 4s 9d to adult female workers. Mr. Velvin represented hospital board pharmacists, retail chemists, assistants, retail shop assistants, retail grocers’ assistants, drivers, cleaners, caretakers, lift attendants, performing musicians, watchmen, print- i ing trade employees, dental technicians, dental assistants and tramway authorities’ employees covered by 11 awards. Prior to June 1. and under Court awards, said Mr. Velvin, the adult female workers in question were due to receive the same rates of pay as adult male workers similarly employed. While the Court was required to determine actual award rates, in some instances there was evidence in awards of complete agreement between employers and employees on the question of applying the same pay rates to both men and women, said Mr. Velvin. He submitted that the Court’s order of June 10 had not taken into account or given effect to, the intention of the parties to entitle adult women to the same ■ pay rates as adult men. WOMEN APPRENTICES Mr. Velvin said that in three awards apprenticeship orders provided for women workers, find ho submited that that was an additional reason for giving women similar consideration to men. In six other awards one schedule only of pay rates existed, and he submitted that this provide sufficient grounds for granting the application. Mr. Justice Tyndall said it was incorrect to say that the prescribed minimum rate was the same for females as for males in any of those awards from 1942 to 1947. Mr. Velvin said that by differentiating in lhe increase awarded to women in its general order, the Court had departed from a recognised practice of many years’ standing. He added that the women referred to in the application had relatively speaking, suffered a reduction tn their wages. Mr. Justice Tyndall: Every increase you ask for is for a relative reduction for someone else.

Mr. J. R. Hanlon, for the employers, opposed the application. He said the object of the Court’s interim order was to offset known and anticipated increases in the cost of living. The Court assumed no doubt, said Mr. Hanlon, that a greater share nf the extra costs would be borne by adult male workers when compared with female and junior workers. The Court reserved its decision.