The Waihi Daily Telegraph. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE WAIHI MINER MONDAY DECEMBER, 11, 1905

Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume V, Issue 1504, 11 December 1905, Page 2

The Waihi Daily Telegraph. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE WAIHI MINER

MONDAY DECEMBER, 11, 1905

''■' ' „ ' -Heifl shall the f reus the I'eoplo's night tn»mtani Un»wedbylnSuonoo and unbribod by"gainj . HorepatriotTrtithliJvlorwaspfMiiiitsiiian ■ PltdEedtoßeliirion Liberty, and L»w '; ".

■■■■:■■■' ' I IN looking fhrougli the Statutes of last Besßionwu find that an amendment of. a'' good deal of public im-portance;-.has been made in. the -Arbitrajti'Qti Act, It had hitherto be»n fheMaw'lhat only (hose employers who were mentioned in an award were: liable for. the wages specified. • For instance, if a carpenters' union sought higher wagesi l he union cited all recognised em-: ployers in that branch of labour, and iii lhe award all the employers : cited were mentioned as the persons "dompe'lled fo pay whatever rale was "decreed, the result being that persons were not in tUe trade, but ; who;em'p]6yed a'carpenter decasipn?ai!y^re;|exempti; And,could pay whaMliej^ ;|appened:'somd ; timei ; yagoV:in ilhe instead ] pfc' calling .

arqbite>pt\ ( j fin? regard to 'economy ■■ carpehtorß to work at reduced; rates.. The; fact became kuown, and he was haled before the (Jonrt for iin alleged, breach of : the carpenters' • award, - The case collapsed, tub Conrt-ruling' that he was h gi'ocer and 'not a builder, and that as only builders had been cited he was exempt from the award. It seemed to be a test case, for others of a like nature Had been reported, and the ruling of the Court had-perbipi-. something to do with, the. amendment under notice. A grocer ■or anyone else \yho takes on a carpenter to work as i\ carpenter has no\V to pay him in term's of the; award, just as if ho were a builder. The amendment is not confined to carpentry, but applies distinctly -to all trades and callings for which an awjird has been made by the Arbitration Court. In viow of the hardship which the exemption caused to om'ployere bound the award, and to men wh.o worked for awardwagesand nothing less, tbo amendment is not oiily reasonable;.but necessary. Tlierataa of wages awarded by tbo Arbitration Court are ueyer excessiyo, : and there is nothing unfair in preventing . super-economical outsiders from (lodging an award by becoming their own employers and hiiingmen at lower rales of wages than are paid by employers bona fide. It i 3 a clause that all unionists'and employers who are parlies" lo Arbitration Court awards will approve of. . I's only opponents will Bo -persons who are keen .oh having work, done for them at a lower ratethat is paid by decent employers. It wiib the latter class who were responsible for the introduction of the Conciliation and 'Arbitration Act, Like the poor, they are always with us. '•..,. . i