Harvester Judgemenet

7/28/2019 Harvester Judgemenet

1/25

EX PARTE H. V. McKAY .Excise Tarif 1906 fAio. 16 of 1p06)--BppLicaiion f or declaratiolz

iIza3 wages acre fmr and reasonable- est of f ai r nes s and ~ ~ ~ ~ ~11, 14, 15, 16,reasonableness. 17, 18, 21, 22,I he rest to be applied in ascertaining what are fair and reasoaable $ $ ~ y 3 ~ 5 y3conditions of remuneration of labour, under the Excise Tarip 1906, is, in s,iz,ig&.the case of unskilled labourers-what are the normal needs of the averageemployee regarded as a human being living in a civilized community?Under the Act the remuneration of the employee is not dependlent onthe profits of the particular employer. The conditions as to remunerationmust be fair and reasonable whether the profits are small or great; andthe employer will not be compelled to produce his books in order todisclose his profits,An Excise Tariff Standard for Time-work* set forth for the guidanceo the applicant and of other manuiacturers in similar circumstances.

This was an application by H. V. R/IcICay for a declaration bythe President that the conditions as to the rmmerati m of labourin the applicants factory were fair and reasmable.Schuz!t for the A pplicant.Daffy, K .C., and Artlzzir, to object, on behalf off the Agricul-tural Implement M akers, Society ; the Amalgamated I ron-moulders ; the Amalgamated Iron Foundry Employees;Tins3mitbs and Iroln-workers Society;and the Iron-workersP-ssistants Solciety.Sufch, Secretary of the Federated Saw Mills, Timber Y ard, andGeneral Woodworkers Association, to object, on behalf ofthe Federated Sawmill, T imber Y axd, and General Wolold-workers Union ; the Amalgamated Carpenters ; the C6ach-bklders and the Wheelwrights. Society ;and the Certifica,te:lEngine-drivers.

A t the opening of the case, Duffy, K C . , asked for an order forthe production of the applicants books relating to the c&t ofmanufacture


2/25

21907. reasonable wages, whatever I may find to be fair and reasonable;

H. v. bIcKAy. lrnd I shall not regard any plea olf impecuniosity or small profits.I .yhall refuse to make any order as to the btooks sholwing thecost af manufacture. With regard to the balance-s,heets, at presentI do m t see that they are material, though they may become so.

T he President, after hearing witnesses on all sides, deliveredthe fodlowing J U DGM E N T :-A$plicaf.ion of H . V. McKay under secJ ion 2 ( d ) of the Excise

Ta~i ff1906. T he Commonwealth Parliament has by this Act im-posed certain Excise duties on agricultural implements; but it hasprovided that the Act shall not apply to goods manufactured inA ustralia under conditicks as to the remuneration of labour whichare declared by the President of the Court to be fair and reasoa-able. My d e duty is to ascertain whether the conditions of re-muneration submitted to me are fair and reasonable. I havenot the function of finding out whether the rates of wages have, orhave not, been in f act pa,id since the 1st of J anuary, 1907, whenthis A ct came into force.I selected M r. McK ays application out of some I I Z ap-plications made by V ictorian manufacturers because I foundthat the factory was one of the largest, and had thegreatest number and variety of employees; and because hisapplication was to be keenly fought. T he Act left me free toinform my mind as best I could; and I was at full liberty to limittheevidence, or even to act without evidence. I felt that, in thecourse of the contest on this application, I should best learn whatit was necessary for me to learn with regard to the various opera-tions in the manufacture, the functions of the employees, the cliaracter *of the work, and the proper conditions of remuneration. Iintimated to all the applicants that I should make use of the infor-mation acquired by me in the course of this *application for thepurpose olf dealing with the other applications; that I shoulcl nallow all the same kind of evidence to be given over again; butthat each of the subsequent appl ipnts should be at l iberty to shoany exceptional characteristics of his undertaking. Lest by achance there should, be an y consideration omitted by M r. M cHay,also offered to Mr. Coldham, who appeared for several large manfacturers, an opportunity to call evidence before McK ays cashould be closed; but he did not do so.

T he first difficulty that faces me is as to the meaning, of the AT he words are few, and at first sight plain of meaning; but,applying the words, one finds that the L egislature has not indicawhat it means by ( air and reasonable )--what is the modelcri terion by which fairness and reasonableness are to be determinbe regretted that the L egislature has not given a definit

Ex pzrte

0

Novomber E,1907.

-- -._


3/25

3tion of the L egislature, not of the 1907.Emparteiiry, to deal with social and ecoaomic problems; it is for the H. v. M U K A Y .iasy to apply, and, when necessary, to interpret the enact- The President.

s of the L egislature.-

But here, this whole controversial pro-m, with its grave social and economic bearings, has been com-itted to a J udge, who is not, at least directly, responsible, andEven if thelegation of duty should be successful in this case, it by no meansws that it will be so hereafter. I do not protest against theulty of the problem, but: against the confusion of functions-inst the failure to define, the shunting of legislative respon-easonable to tell a Court to! do whatestate, and yet lay down no laws

I n the csurse of the long discussion o'f this case, I have becomenvinced that the President of this Court is put in a false posi-iciary in the public confidence isgely owing to the fact that the J udge has not to devise greatnciples of action as between great classes, or to lay down whatfair and reasonable as between contending interests in the com-unity; but has to carry out mandates of the L egislature, evolvedinion after debate in Parliament.t be found wise thus to blring thecia1 Department within the range olf political fire. These re-

s would not be made if the L egislature had defined the generalciples on which I am to determine whether wages are fair andnable or the reverse. But I shall do my best to ascertain Iqence the meaning of the enactment; and Parliament can, ofThe provisioln for fai r and reasonable remuneration is obviouslymployees in the industry; and ite meant to secure to them something which they cannot getthe ordinary system of individual bargainhg with employers.,Parliament Feant that the conditions shall be such.as they canmeant that those conditions areemployees "will accept and em-ervice-there would have been nouneration could safely have been

to the usual, but unequal, contest, the "higgling of the market "r lablour, with the pressure for bread on one side, and the pressure

e to public opinion.

rse, amend the Act if it desire to declare another -meaning.


4/25

41907. and they have been unable to do

E. v. MC-Y. gaining, one can conceive of a collective aglwent-an agrThepresident. between all the employers in a given trade on the one side, anthe employees on the other-it seems to me that the framers ofagreement would have to take, as t

cost of living a civilized being.]horses, on the terms that he gment, I have no doubt that it is Bs duty to give them properand water, and such shelter anare the means of obtaining canmoding for fair and reasonable remuneration for the employees, mthat the wages shall be sufficient to provide these things, anding, and a condition of frugal comfort estimated by currents t a n d a r d This, then, is the primasy test, the test which Iapply in ascertaining the minimum wage that can be treatfair and reasonabde in the case of unskilled labmourers.who ha,ve acquired a skilled handicraft have to be paid morethe unskilled labourers minimum; and in ascertaining howmore, in the case of each of the numerous trades concerned ifactory, I have been invited to make myself expert in a largeber of technical details, and familiar with the mysteries ofmechanical appliances. Fortunately, I can find guidance morefactory than could be afforded by my mere inspection of the prand machinery in the factory, or even by the evidence of diffexperts in the several trades.

I may add that the view which I have stated of my duty uthe Act seems to be supported by a critical verba.1 examinathe words ,fair and reasonable used in collocation. UEngl ish Act, an agreement bletween a solicitor and client ascan be set aside, unle& the sdici toabrle ; and it has been held bfy the Court of A ppeal thatrefers to the mode in which the agreement has been obtainreasonable means that the aproportio1n .to the work done (in ring the reawning to the present case, I cannot think that aplody& and a workman contract on an equal footing, orfair agreement as to wages, when the workman submitsfor a low wage to avoid starvation or pauperism (or soimethit} for himself and his family; 01 that the agreement: isable if it does not caxry a wzge sufficient to insure thefood, shelter, clothing, frugal comfort, provision for evil dayaswell as reward for the special skill of an artisan if he is oe&t to disclose his books, so as to enabtle the objectors to sare his profits; and that if the profits are large the wages s

Ea parlee -- __,_--

4

-

I t was strongly urged before


5/25

5 '

ge also. The applicant objected to such disclosure, and I de- 1907.ed to compel him. I cannot find anything in the Act to suggest E%. parte. M C K A Y .scheme of profit sharing.vy import duty as to stripper harvesters---,f;Iz each. Then the'se Tari ff imposes on Australian harvesters an Excise duty ofeach; but even this Excise duty is not ,to apply if the goodsre manufactured under conditions as to remuneration which I (orme other of the authorities mentioned in the Act) declare to beir and reasonable. That is all. Fair and rea,sonable remunera-

on is a condition precedent to exemption from the duty ;and themuneratiop of the emplolyee is not made to depend on the profitsf the employer. I f the profits are nil, the fair and reasonable

neration must be paid;* and if the profits are IOO per cent., itbe paid. There is far more ground for the view that, undersection, the fair ,and reasonable remuneration has to be paidre profits are ascertained-that it stands on the same level ascost of the raw material of the manufa,cture. I n this case,reover, M r. M cRay relieved me of all doubt by *admitting,ugh his counsel, that he is able to pay fair and reasonablewhatever may be declared to be fair and reasonable. ,%Aspresent advised, I shall certainly refuse to pry, orallow others to pry, into the financial affairs of thefacturers, or to' expose their financial affairs to their com-o'rs in business. I f it is to be cards on the table, it ought-all cards on the table. But having regard to the Tariff pro-

ion given, the Excise exemption offered, and the admission whichhave:mentioned, I shall ignore any consideration that the businessil l not stand what L should otherwise regard as fair and reason-le remuneration.I come now to consider the remuneration of the employees men-

oned in this application. 1 propose to take unskilled labourersst. The standard wage-the wage paid to the most of theburers by the applicant-is 6s. per day of eight hours, with notra allowance for overtime; but there is one man receiving olnly6d. There is no constancy of emFloyment, as the employer hasut a considerable number of men off in the intervals betweenseasons. The seed-dri ll and ploiugh season,' 1 am told, is in theier part-of the year, abut A pri l ; but the busiest time is theester season, about August to November. But even if the em-ent were constant and uninterrupted, is a wage of 36s. perfair and reasonable, in view oif the cost of living in Victoria?ave tried to mascertain the c at of living-the amount which hase paid for food, shelter, clothing, for an average labourer with

mal wants, and under normal conditions. Some very interestingerne has been given, by wonking men's wives and others; and

T he Czcstoms Tariff 1906 imposes a d ePZ&.

B


6/25

1907.Ez parteThe; President.H , V. N O K A Y .- the evidence has been absolutely undisputed. I allowed Mr. Scthe applicants counsel, an opportunity to call evidence U F ~subject even after his case had been closed; but notwithstandingfortnight or more allowed him far investigation, he admitted

he could produce no specific evidence in contradiction. He aadmitted that the evidence gven by a land agent, Mr. Aumont,to the rents, and .by *a butcher as to meat, could n5t be contdicted. There is no dolubt that there has been, during the 1year or two, a progressive rise in renxs, and ih the price of meat,in the price of many of the modest requir~mentsof the whoushoJd.an artisan, appears to be 7s.; and, taking the rent at 7s.; thesary average weekly expenditure for a labourers home of aboutpersons would seem to be about &I 12s. 5d. T he lists of exditure submitted to me vary not only in amounts, but in basescomputatiqn. B ut 1 have confined the figures to rent, groceribread, meat, milk, fuel, vegetables, and frui t; and the averagethe list of n,ine housekeeping wolmen is &I 12s. 5d. This expditure does not cover light (some of the lists omitted light), clothboots, furniture, utensils (being casual, not weekly expenditurates, life insurance, savings, accident or benefit societies, lossemployment, union pay, bo,oks and newspapers, tram and train fasewing machine, mangle, school requisites, amusements and hoilidintoxicating liquors, tobacco, sickness and deaeh, domestic help,any expenditure for unusual contingencies, religion, or charity.the wages are 36s. per week, the amount left to pay for allthings is only 3s. 7d.; and the area is rather l arge for 3s. 7cover-even in the case of total abstainers and non-smokers-theof most of the men in question. One witness, the wife of onewas formerly a vatman in candle wolrks, says that in the dwhen her husbland was wortking at the vat at 36s. a week, sheunable to provide meat far him 011 about three days in the wThis inablility to Frocure sustaining foold-whatever kind mayselected-is certainly not conducive to the maintenance od the woiin industrial efficiency. Then, on looking at the rates ruling ewhich are responsible to electors or others for economy, very genrally pay 7s.hilelbourne City Council also.V ictoria, thirteen pay 7s. as a minimum; and only two pay a1907, fixed 7s. I n the agreement made in A delaide betweenployers and employees, in this very industry, the minimum is 7s.On the, other ,hand, the rate in the V ictorian Railway woirksi.; 6s. 6d. But the V ictorian Railways Cosmmissioners dol, Isume, aim at a profit; and as we were told in the evidence,

T he usual rent paid by a labourer, as distinguished

where, 1 find that the public bodies which do not aim at profit,T he M.etropolitan Board has 7s. for a minimum;Of seventeen municipal councils

- so low as 6s. 6d. T he Woodworkers ages Board, 24th


7/25

7ials keep their fingers on the pulse of external labour conditions, 1907.hx p&t? .R Jendeavour to pay not molre than the external trade minimum 11. v. M C E A Y .My hesitation has been chiefly between 7s. and 7s. 6d.; he President.-388).t I put the minimum at I S . , as I do not think that I could refusedeclare an emplocyers remuneration t,o be fair and reasonable, iffind him paying 7s. Under the circumstances, I cannot declaret the applicants coaditions of remuneration are fair and reason-e a$ to his labourers.I could stoF here, take no further trouble, and simply refusedeclare that the applicants conditions as to remuneration areir and reasonable. But this course would leave the applicant in

He mightereafter pay the 7s. to his labourers, and come again for exemp-n, and then find that his other wages are regarded as too low.w, as I have had to consider and forrn an ofpinion as to the appli-nts whole list of wa,ges, I do not see why I should not franrldyhim know my conclusiolns, in order that, if he seek remission ofcise for his future m~uf a~tur es ,e may secure it by simply pay-what-until further order-I regard as fair and reasoliableges. For I have had mentally to form a standard oh fair andsomble wages in order to. decide whether the applicant comesMoreover, I am impressed with thetance and the justice of u~formityas between manufacturersormity so far as circumstances permit it. I cannot have onefor A, and mother for B, where they rnanufact6re under con-I must be free to consideralloiw for exception,d circumstances; but they must be very ex-ional indeed to justify me in departing frum uniformity. There-, to insure this uniformity, and to gjve to the applicant and other

ufacturers that certainty as to my requirements, which is sotial for their business, I propose to annex to my order adule, stating openly the minlimum conditions as to remuneratiobn.h I regard as fair and reasonable. I shall call this (The

dark as to the wages paid to his other emplolyees.

e 2r below that standard.?

ions which are substantially similai.

ise Tariff Standard. -pass now to the various trades. whicl? are concerned in theations of making a,griculltural implements; and first, i,ron-lders. - This trade at once raises the question as to Victorianes Board determinations. Personally, I should have been veryto have the assistance of a Victorian Wages Board, i f it weregenuine, unfettered decision of emrloyers and employees con-nt with all the pi nts and details of an industry, and meetingriendly conference. But it has tol& remembered that I have towith this industry through all A ustralia, and that I have no

t to let me State, through its particular machinery, prescribe


8/25

81907. the conditions of labour for other States. Nor can I let the

H.3s parta. MaEau. torian manufacturers carry on their undertakings at lower wathan. manuf apurers elsewhere, simply because a V ictorian WagBoard has prescribed low wages. I n the next place, the conditunder which each Board acts have to be carefully scrutiniThere is an Agricultural Implements Board, but i t is underoperation sf the reputable employers section (S. 83).inquiry was finally opened on the 7th October, after long adments, granted by my*predecessor with the view of giving thea;rriFle time for coming to some conclusion with reg,ard to waBut the Board had failed to come to any Conclusion, and the M initer of L abour had suggested that the Board should adjourn tillamending Bill should be passed (see letter of a3i.d Septem1907) . On the evenings of the 7th and 8th October, however,Board suddenly came to certain determinations, which have bpressed upon me. But it turns out, from the evidence of the Setary of the Board, that the chairman, finding himself coercedthe reputable employers section, declined to receive any motfor a wage exceeding the average appearing from the returns

. wages paid by reputable employers. This restriction uponfree action of the Board deprives the Boards determinationalm& all value in the eyes of an outside investigator, and especiin the eyes of one who has my duty to perform. If my view ofduty in ascertaining what are fair and reasonable conditions asremunqraiion, as stated above, ,is right, how can I fulfil that dby accepting the average rates which employers think fit to giveindividual bargaining with men. seeking work ? I should attach,think, overwhelming value to conclusions freely formed bty expin the trade, representing the opposing interests; but I declineaccept the mere conclusions of employers, just as I should d eto accept the mereconclusions of employes. Again, a determinatof a Wages Board may be reversed or varied by the Court of Itrial A ppeals (section 120). J T he Court consists of a Supcourt J udge;andheis bound to lower the minimum wage fixed byBoard if he thinks that it may prejudice he progress, maintenaof, or scope of , emplolyment in the trade or industry. I n otwords, he is to put the interests of the business--of the prmaker-abve the interests of the human beings employed. I can4hink that this system is consistent with that marked out for methe Excise Tariff. T he scheme of the Excise Tariff seems tobased on making fair and reasonable remuneration a first charge,it were, on the gross receipts-based on putting such rernuneratin the same position as the cost of raw materials. I cannot delemy functions to the Judge, whoever may be appointed from time

. time, of the Court of Industrial A ppeals, acting under a veryferent Act, under conditions which coerce him on every side,

-he President.


9/25

9pecially when I know that he, though non-expert in the industry, 1907.enabled to reverse what experts in the industry may have con- ~ ~ $ C K a Y .urred in deciding.r V ictorian coaditions on other States, and I shall keep steadilyview the importance to the manufacturers of certainty and (so farpossible) uniformity, throughout A ustralia. I am forced to makehese observations on the V ictorian Factories Act, in order to ex-ain why I cannot aiccept the Wages Board determinations as. suffi-nt for the purpose of my decision under the Excise Tar i f 1906.have no right, and I have no desire, to criticise what any Parlia-nt may dol. But when the determinations of Wages Boards areressed upon me, I have to consider all the circumstances, in order

to see whether these determinations are a safe guide for me in theerformance of my duty under the Excise Tariff.But the case of the Irolnrnoulders Board is different. This is thely Board which applies to any of the trades concerned in thisustry; and it is not under the operation of the reputable em-yers section. I have, therefore, been strongly tempted to bowhe judgment of men who must know bettef, and to accept theings of this Board, 1st October, 1904, and 2nd A pri l, 1906.chief point to be coasidered is, the distinction made by thisd between light ironmoulding (including agricultural imple-

s vr70rk) and engineering, or heavy ironmoulding. T he Boards fixed a minimum of 10s. and 9s. for the latter, and a minimum8s. for the former. Unfortunately, it turns out that this Deter-atlm was carried only by casting vote of the chairman -leman who had ,not any previous, experience of the trade. T heloyers voted for this distinction; the employees voted all againstI t is significant that the heavy ironmoulders, speaking througneir unioa, dol not wish to be paid more than the Iight ironmoulders.I had to decide from the evidence, and from what I have seen,

should say that the extra pace, and he monotonoas repetition ine light ironmoulding fully b,alance the extra skill and the extraeight in the heavy vyolrk. T he tax upon the muscular and nervousergy is, I should think, pretty equal at the end olf the day. Butrely mainly on the uniform practice of the greater foundries wheredistinction is made. T he A ustral Otis, V icksrian Railway wo&-ps, Robinsons, Rluirs, A ustralian Steel Company, Brunswickins foundry, Maclcenzie, made no distinction between heavy andt. I t is-true that these are not agricultural implement factories.

they have plenty of light ironmoulding of other sorts; andmen engaged at it are paid at the same rate as the men onvy work. The ruling all-round rate in the foundries which Ie ~entioneds 10s. per day, although some men are Paid moresome special skil l. T he rate of 10s. is also the rate agreedbetwen master moulders and men in the New South Wales

I n addition, I cannot impose the Victorian A ct The


10/25

101907. agreement. I see, moreover, no sufficient reason why, if 10s. isEs parteH. V. M U K A Y . fair and reasonable rate,for the average journeyman fitter, it sho

The President. not be fai r and reasonable for the average journeyman modI have not omitted to consider the fact that, according toUnited States Eulletin of T he Bureau olf L abolur, 1906 (p. 22-the average wages per hour of the agricultural implement emplis less than the average wages of the employees in the foundrymachine shop. But, so far as I can make out from the bullboys as well as men are reckoned for computing the averages; aof course, there would be a larger proportion of boys in agricuimplement factories, as the work is light, than in the engineworks. As for turners, I have foll lowed the practice of thetorian Railways, and placed them In a class apart from theiron machinists. I n the V ictorian Railways both fitters andhave a minimum wage of 10s. . T hi s is the minimum of $hepolitan. Board, and the union rate prescribed by the AmalgSociety of Engineers. T he Melbonrne City Council rate isfor fitters; but, on the other hand, the New South Wales agrprescribes, I know not why, only 8s. 6d. T he principal engishops pay 10s. I adoFt that figure. The other iron machseemed likely to raise a formidable problem, because of the alledifferences in the s, l d ;kq*Uired to work the numerous ingenlabour-saving machines-planing machine, boring machine, centelathe, tapping machine, washer lathe, punching and sheaxingchine, pipe-cutter, ci rcular cutting machine, dri lling machine,making machine, &c.all these machinists tolgethei at gs., except drillers; and I prto follow their example-especially as it is accepted and appby the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. ,T he drillers, asas the dressers, 1 treat as if they were labourers with someskill.

There has been a Frotractkd contest as to blacksmiths; but heas in the case of the molulders, I think that far too much has bmade of the difference between heavy and light work-for the hework in engineering shops there is generally more mechanical asance. I f there is more ski ll, there is less pace and less monotthan ) in agricultural factories. T he system adojpted by the appli s graphically indicated by one witness (p. 505): I was kesprings (for disc ploughs) for a goold while, to knock out a nu50 in the mo8rnin8g nd 50 in the afternoon. . . . Any manon one class od work will become very fast, and it is pr6fitabthe emplolyer to keep him on that class sf work. . . . I wasstays for disc ploughs for about three weeks. The damage dto eyes and ears, and the nervous and muscular strain, seemat least equal in agricultural factories.

-

But I find that the V ictorian Railways c

m

I adopt 10s. 111 r


11/25

11owing the V ictorian Railways, the M etropolitan Board, the 1907.h-building trade, the New Smoath Wales agreement, the Mel- 1-1. v. MCKAY.

rne City Council, and the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. TIE President.ight add that, in the South Australian worksholps in 1902, thedard rate was 10s. 6d. ; and in the New South Wales railwaysa8y, as I arn told, most of the smiths receive 11s. 8d. Theksmith's strikers I fix at 7s. 6d. They are not artisans; buthave a skill greater than the unskilled laboarer. M r. McKaq-most of his strikers less than 6s. ;and yet even Mr. R igby, o'fA ustral Otis Colmpany, a witness for the plaintiff, says thatis a proper wage.

Ex parte

ming to woodworkers, I find that the applicant treats gs. as hisard rate for carpenters. A t all events, this is the rate of Fag-to 19 out of 23 men whom he admits to be journeymen. Mr., who appeared as Secretary of. the Federated Sawmills, T im-Y ards, and General Woodworkers' Employees' Association,

y pressed me to fix either 10s. 8d., the rate awarded by Mr.Cussen in a, recent building dispute, or else 10s'. 4d., thefixed for all but coarse wocik by the Woodworkers Wages(24th J uly, 1907) . I have read M i . J ustice Cussen'sfor his judgment; and, so f ar as my inforrnatioln enables mea conclusion, the conditions of the trade in the case ofing carpenters, the coaditioas which induced the learned J udgethe rate at 10s. 8d., do no't, exist in the case of factory car-ters. The finding, of the Woodwolrkers Board (which is noter the ''reputable employers" section), has certainly impressed

But the standard is 10s. in the V ictorian Railways, the Metro-tan Board, the M elbourne City Council, and the average of thir-municipal councils is ab ut 10s. gd. T he South A ustralianments, made at the instance of Mr. J ustice O'Colnnolr, is 10s.ve not been sh6swn any sufficient reason for giving carpentersories a higher minimum than the other artisans; and, afternsideration, therefore, I fix the rate at 10s. This, I may add,e usual rate in the New Zealand awards of which I have an!

e

-e distinctions between wood machinists, added to the distinc-between iron machinists, seemed to make my task hopeless al:(' haping machine, bench hand, band sawyer, buzz planer,ng machine, crosscut sawyer, tenoning machine, circular saw,

-papering machine, boring machine "-how was I to distinpishdative skill, the relative danger, the relative conditions; andwas I to assign the proper grade of pay to! each? But therian Railways again came to my aid. They made no dis-except (as 1understand) i n the case of the shaping machine,.

(am


12/25

121907. which is very dangerous. T he usual rate of the V ictorian

f!f ~$oK au. ways is gs. But the Furnitur,; Wages Board, ~3rd ctober,Thepresident. fixed the minimum at 9s. 8d. for most of these machines; anM r. Sutcli admits that 8s. is a fair wage folr men working a

machine or a cross-cut saw. T hi s is the rate fixed by theworkers Wages Eo&d (24th J uly, 1907) .5s. I od. per day to the man who1 works the boring machine.man is called a (machinist in the list; but the applicantsays that he is an improver-another proof of the indefinitethe distinction between journeymen and non- j ~urne~me~,.The work of painters is disagreeable and unhealthy, but 1not involve much heavy muscular strain, 011, indeed, in the cbrush hands, much skil l. T he appli cants minimum fo,r brush

is 6s., but molst of them get 7s. H is minimum for writers andis 8s. This is too low. In, May, rgo7, the M elboarnePainters Association agreed to1 gs. as a general wage,making any distinction.rates are gs. and 10s. T he Woodworkers Wages Bolard8s. 6d. as the minimum.minimum; but, unless I mistake the meaning oE what I-iasbethis figure is applicable to tholse who paint trucks, andsuch rough wolrk. T he kIetroFolitan Board has 8s. for plaiwork, and the hlelbdurne City Council has gs.awards, which I have seen, vary frolm 8s. to 10s.fluences me much is the New S o u t h , ~a ~e sgreement, saby Mr. ,J ustice OCoanor, which fixes 10s.a fair thing to fix gs. for bsush hands, and J OS. for write1ners.

With regard to the engine-drivers, I adopt the scliemeFurni ture Wages Board determination ( ~3r d October, 19Engiinie-drivers, with iothar work, 10s.; engine-drivers, fiengines, gs. zd. T he V ictorian Railways have 9s. as the stbut they dol not give the engine-driver other work; and thno distinction between first-class and second-class engines.applicants engines are first-class. I have no precedent putme for the malleable iron annealers; but if I may judze f rI saw in the factory, they should get 8s. if the unskilled

d gets 7s. T he pattern-maker was accidentally olmitted in thcants first two lists. T he applicant pays him ondy gs.the V ictorian Railways and the Hoffman Brick Companpattern-maker T I S . T he Brick Tra-de Wages Bolard(Octtnber, 1907). I have no evidence of any pattern-mwhere getting less than 11s.

I now come to the difficult question as to ( mprovers.provers appear in the lists submitted to me by the applic

-T he applicant pay

T he evidence is that the usual M eT he Victoirian Railways have 8s. 6d

. T he NewButOn the whole,

-


13/25

13do not appear in the wages books or in the wages record sup-

d tu the Chief Inspector under the Factpries Act.aps, to except the case of ironmoulders ever since the Factorieswas extended to the applicants factory as regards this trade.men may work at the same bench, at the same work, with theski ll. K either knuws that there -is any distinction betweenin description or in wages; and yet the applicant puts ones lis; as a journeyman, because he receives 8s. a day, and thein the list as an impover, because he receives 7s. Thi slly happened in the case of two men working as ironmoulders.nut unfair to say that an mprover is a man working at awho receives less than the standafd wage., There is no limithe age of an improver. I find one man an improver at

age of 429 ; another at 31. I am told that there are some mennever become proficient at their trade. T hat is quite true;I cannot believe that such a large proportion of V ictorian lads,e applicants list shows under the head of improvers, arele to attain average proficiency after five or seven years propering. I have clear evidence that in the V ictorian Railways work-

s only three cases of inability to learn have been found withinlast six years, and yet the apprentices there average 25 perum, and there are over 1, 000mechanics. In the applicants liste are 59 adult men doing artisans work receiving less than evenstandard wage for journeymen, and called mprovers, but 8are many other adults in the same position, j et not called byname; and I have &mated 189 persons under 21 in this fac-out of 495 employees. In the fitters shop, out of I OZ em-

s, only 28 receive so much as 8s. T he rest are called m-s (14), helpers ( IS), apprentices bound ( I) ,entices not bound (24), boys (16). I have had specificnce submitted to me as to three men in the blacksmiths shop,one man among the ironmoulders, who were doing averageeymans work, with skill at least equal to that of others whocalled journeymen; and yet the applicant calls these men m-H e calls them improvers inhis application to!me simplyse they were receiving less than his journeymans standard, 8s.were receiving 7s. 8d., 7s. Td., 7s. Gd., and 7s. respectively.absurd to pretend that any foreman, however discriminatingsess values of work with such nicety as these wages indicate-nny-a day sometimes, or sixpence a week. R k . G. McKny,

xes the wages for the factory, says that he pays the menIy 500 in number, and of many different trades-accordingr values. Of course, he means according to his opinion of their\et when I asked whqt was the difference between an im-

at 7s. rod. : aav and a journevman at 8s. a day in the de-eiit of skeet-iron workers, I f r . P\lcK xy adm;ti.ed that there

190I ought, ~ ~ ~ & o K A y *pzd;1

> 7

vers. -


14/25

141907. was no apprechble recognisable difference between the men cB X parteH. v. M U E A Y . T onding to the IS. a week difference between their wages.

ThePresident. of the applicants WheSSeS, b!h. Rigby, of the A ustral Otispany, complacently assured me, on the strength of a brief itioa of the factory, and of $he list submitted by the applicant,without knowing the qualifications of the individual men, thatwages paid are, in his opinion, fair and reasonable. He didcoasider tlie quality of the men at all , but the class, of work.can only say that I am not going to accept as final the employunchecked opinion as to an employees wolrth in wages, ally mthan I should acceFt the value of a horse on the word of antending vendor. T he one-sided nature of an employers valuaof an employee is indicated clearly by the frank statementsRlr. Geo. RlcK ay :-( I pay the men what I consider them tohoaestly worth (p. 216). I n fixing the wages I have endeavouredget labour at the ciieapest price that I honestly could (p. IMr. Rigby says that his idea of a fair wage is what the emplon looking at the man, chooses to give him for his work (p. 2These statements apply to all wages, including the wages paidthose men whom the applicant chooses to call improvers inlist.One is a class of fully-trained men, men of average proficiencthe least, who1 are put off with petty increases of wage, perhapsolr zd. a day, when they ought to be-getting the journeymansdasd. T he other class consists of men not ful ly trained-menhave not been properly taught-men who usually have notapprenticed by indenture-but who have been emplolyed at suoperations of the trade without being instructed in all its branI gather from the evidence a tendency on the Fart of the empto pick out the easiest part of an, artisans wolrk, and to! givelads or younger men to do, paying them less wages than thedard; and to coafine the standard wage to those who1 do thedifficult parts.by no means conducive to efficiency in the trade, although i t tenspeed in the operations. T he employees of the latter class ascourse, conscious of being below the journeymans standard,they have to accept almolst anything that the employer offers.existence of this class is a standing menace to industrial orderindustrial peace, as well as a hindrance to industrial profiinferior tradesmen i f they ask for a little less than the swage, and the result is that the efficient tradesman haswaik aboat, . . . Unless the efficient tradesman cuts his rthe imperfectly-trained men are taken an. - we j0Umhave to go without work months and months because we Can

-

T he truth seems to be that there a.re two classes of impr

T hi s moacrtonous application to the easier wor


15/25

15 Iurneymans wage. I t is this body of half -trained men, hang-on to the skirts of a trade, that is used for the purpose of EmparteOn this irregulare of industrial inefficients an employer can always rely for tern-ry assistance in industrial crises. I t is not my function, how-, to urge the importance, from every point of view, of propering, and the necessity for obligations of a definite characterfor a definite term between master and apprentice. But asthe men in the former class of ( improvers, of course, I refus2declare that the coaditions as tot remuneration are fair and reason-

le; and as to1 the unfortunate men in the latter class, I am utterlyable to include them in my Excise Standard: I can fix no ratethem; or they defy definition-they defy classification. ,, Thereno limit as to age, or as to experience, for an improver, and thereno satisfactory means for settling capacity. I t may be fair andsonablle to pay one man 6d. a day; and fair and reasonable toy another gs. a day. But it by no means follocws that, becauseprovers are not mentioi led in my standard, an employer who hasprovers cannot get a declaration under the Act, such as willpt him from Excise duties. I have no polwer to say that im-vers shall not be employed. But the Excise Standard will beguide to the employer. He must take his risk and the burdenproving that what lie gives to each of his impro.lrers is fair andolnable remuneration. I have ,not olverlooked the considerationan employer who wants to make sure of exemption from Excise (ihave considerable inducement to pi t rid of men who do note within the classification in the Excise Standard, and may, ine cases, dismiss his half-trained mprovers. If we were tord only the efficiency of the trade and the general good, thisIt would pi-ohbl y be desirable, I f a job iS open, and if there

enough wodc to go round, it is better, for many reasons, thatlly-trained man should have the job. But to mitigate, as far

1907.H. V. MCEAP,_ _TheProsiden%.lling down the wages of men fully trained.

ssible, any hardship which might result to1 the class referredy reason of any sudden change, I poipose, in my schedule, toion a continuance, for two years, of the practice of payingwages tot men trnder 25, blut not less than five-eighths of aymans wage for the first year, and three-fourths for thed year. As the Excise Standard is subject to alteratioln, I maythat if any means can hereafter be suggested for settling the

dard for,men in a trade who are neither apprentices nor journey-I shall gladly consider it. The difficulty seems to lie in thee so commonly taken by employers that they will allow noerence in their business, and that they wi ll take no dictationthe value of an employees services, and especially from aBut this very A ct, whether rightly or wrongly, steps in be-the employer and his employee, and ignores this dogma of

.


16/25

* 161907. the employer, so far as human labour is concerned.v. moEAu. so well the value of a mans work as the men of his own

Thepresident. and if the employer and the appropriate union concur in fixmans wage at a rate below the standard, one could be tcertain that the reduction is justified.Having regard to what I have said of mprovers, I nespeak at length of what the applicant calls-and some othersunbound apprentices.incompetent artisans-a reservoir from which mproversdrawn. Mr. Geo. M cK ay told me that he required quasterports from the foremen as to these lads. This report systenot begun till lasts September. These lads are discharged,employer does not want them, at the end of the busy season.have neither constancy of employment nor systematic traininmy Excise Standard should have the incidental effect of seproper indentures for these lads I shall not regret it. I havemy scale for apprentices (bund apprentices) from the determiod the Wages Bolard for Ironmoulders. T he wages for boapprenticed I have taken frolm the V ictorian Railways.I n most cases my standard of wages is higher than the app-as necessarily followed when once I had settled a higher stfor unskilled labourers. As will be seen from my precedimarks, I have generally solid precedents for my standardactual practice of experienced employers in, great undertakingssometimes precedents in awards and Wages Board determinI n cases where I had not the benefit of such guidance, I haveavailed myself of the apFlicants, own practice, as to; the prowhich he maintains between the labourers wage and thatseveral classes of artisans. I make use of his practice as a kcheck or regulator bf my conclusions. For instance, the appllabourers wage is 6s., and the wage of his sheet-iron wor

None canBE arte-

This is another frui tful seed-gro

I

8s. Raving fixed the labtourers wage at 7s,, I put thethe sheet-iroa worker at gs., on the strength of a Newawa8rd and such other materials as are before me; and Iconfideice when I find that I keep nearly the same propthe applicant. The ratio of wages paid by an employer isably safe guide as to the relative merits od the two classes, athe absolute amounts may be too low. There is, therefore,violent or fanciful in my standard.to fix a high wage, but a fair and reasonable wage; not a wis merely enough to keep body and mu1 together, but sbetween these two extremes. Having settled the minimum rtion which I regard as fair and reasmablle for the several claemployees mentioned in the schedule, I may sa,fely leave thspecial skill or special qualifications to obtain such additimuneration as they can by agreement with the employer.

I do not regard it as


17/25

17an expert in the trades, or any of them, I cannot attempt to 1907.redate the nice points of distinction in the higher ranks af g ~ & & ~ur.hope that I do not exceed my duty in adding, that, if it were

-he President.have dealt only with men of average proficiency.y power to give a cer$ificate of exemption to this applicant, onundertaking to pay wages according to the Excise Standard infuture, I should gladly do so. I regard the applicant's under-g as a marvel of enterprise, energy, and pluck. I understandithout my training in any mechanical trade, or in finance, orctory organization, this gentleman, the son of a 'farmer, seeingfarmers required, has invented successful machines, has pro-them in great numbers, has established, and manages, a hugery with numerous and complicated handicrafts, and has sold .machines, not only throughout Australia, but also-in compe-

n with the world-in the A rgentine, in Chil i, and elsewhere.factory bears every si p of business-like manage-t, of devices for ecojnorny in labour, ' of devices forng employees, at high pressure. T he work is minutely sub-d ; the pace of the men in increased by '' repetition " work ;all the latest labour-saving appliances are adopted. A ll thege

omies are, of course, legitimate, so far as the Excise Tariff isrned. T he employer can displace men by intro'ducing machinerychooses. He can make the work as monotonous and as mind-ri ng as he thinks t dbe for his advanta,ge. He has an abso-power o'f cholice of men and of dismissal. He is allowed-y view of the Act is correct-to make any profits that he can,they are not subject to investigatioa. But when he comes, incourse of his economies, to economize at the expense of humanwhen his economy involves the withholding from his employeesasonable remuneration, or reasonable conditions of humannce, then, as I understand the Act, Parliament insists on thent of Excise duty. T he applicant seems to me to have fallen,naturally, into the practice: of not spending more in the pa)'-of his employees than is sufficient to induce them to work forMost naturally, as he buys his raw materials, his iron, andwd in the cheapest market, he, in many cases, pays no moreworkmen than the price at which they can be got. There isidence that he is a bad or an unfeeling employer. His modealing -with his employees is reasonable from an employer'sof view, as a purchaser of labour as a commodity. He fd- , ,, as to ironmoulders, the determination of the Ironmoulderss Board as soon as the Factories Act was extended to Bray-; and, as to the other numerous trades in his factory, he fol-his own judgment and the state of the labour market; forwas nothing else to guide him. These other trades were un-ted, unprotected, and, as was only to be expected, the needs


18/25

18m37. of the workers, by their weight and urgency, have depresseEx parteH. v. MCKAY. scale of wages-have made the standard for journeymen too

"ThePresident. and have caused even that standard to be denied to many wentitled to it. But when I am asked to say-not that his cbut-that his conditions as to remuneration are reasonable,the meaning of the A ct, I have to1 refuse toi do so. I have no,native. I cannot exempt fmm Excise duties, as the cuphraseo'logy implies. The Act does 'that. I have beengravely, to say that a manufacturer's wages are fair and reasif he acted fairly and reasonab'ly in paying low wages becausehas been no standard to guide him.understood that I cannot declare wages to be fair and reasbecause the manufacturer is fair and reasonable. If I wereso , and declare that a wage of 5s. a day is '' fair and ream(under the circumstances), the Customs' would have to actdeclaration until it has been altered. I have to put my footupoa the unreasonable wage at some time; and the properi,s mw , when i t is submitted to me. 1 am glad to find, howthat this is no parasitic industry-that it is not an industrcannot exist except at the expense of the employees, by drawilife blood from them. I t is a healthy, flourishing industry, bathe great demands made by the great staple industry 'off agriculT he applicant does not pretend that he is unable to pay faireasonable wages, whatever they may be forind to be; andeffect od my decision will probably be merely that he mustbetween paying wages according to the Excise Standard and pthe Excise duties.

-

But it cannot be too' cl

I shall declare that so far as the applicant is yoncerned theditio'ns as to remuneration of labour appearing in the sccalled '(T he Excise Tariff Standard for Time-work" arand reasonable for .the purposes o'f the Excise Tariff 1906, athe conditions appearing in list A submitted to me by the apare not fair and reasonable in so f ar as they fall Gelow thadard. A nd the applicant, or any one or more of his emploryebeing less than one-twentieth of the total number of the ernplor any union or other association of workers in any of the tor occupations referred to in the standard may apply for any ation of or addition to the standard as occasion may require.

T he standard is confined to time-work rates. Xearly alapplicant's wages are based 011 time; but there is a littlework. I have nut, however, as yet been supplied with inforsufficient to enable me to draw up a piece-work standard; astandard will protect a manufacturer only so far as his time-are concerned.


19/25

I9As I understand the Act, a manufacturer to whom the standardplies, if he has time workers oaly, will be able to get exemption H. v. MUKAY.m the duties by merely producing to the Customs authorities the The President.ndard (it will be a schedule to the o'rder made on his application),d, then satisfying the Customs that the goods in question haven manufactured under the conditions set forth in the standard.

1907.Ex parte-

- -. - - ._ _- -~ _ _ __

SCHEDULE.THE E X C I SE T A R I F F ST A N DA R D FOR T I M E - W O R K .T he f ohw i ng coaii&tions as to remuneration of labour axe de-red to be fair and reasunable, for the purposes of the Exciseariff 1906, for persons emplo'yed oa time-work in the manufacturesferred to in the Act, if (except as provided in* Part I X . withgard to lorry-drivers and carters) their hours of work do not

ed eight hours per day, o'r 8$ hours on five days in the week, andon the sixth day, ar if (except as aforesaid) there be some otherilar dintribution of hours adopted for the purpose of securing

I

weekly half-holiday on the b,asis of an eight hours dak.The Standard remains, until altered.Part I.- Rate.

s. d.L abourers, unskilled (including f urnacem$n'slabourers and lorry-drivers and carters) .. . 7 0L abourers, slulled (including Fullers-out) ... 7 6Strikers ... ... .. . ... 7 6Dsessers ... ... ... ... ' 1 67 6si1 ers ...I ronbenders '.. ... ... ... 8 oRlalleable iron annealers ... ... ... 8 0Belt cutters ... ... ... ... 8 0Fumacemen ... 9 0Sheet ironwolrkers 9 0Rlachinists, iroa (other than fitters and turners

and including grinders) ... * . I .. 9 0Fitters ... ... ... ... ... 7 0 0Turners ... ... ...Rtoulders (including coremakers) ... ... 10 0Blacksmiths ... ... ... ... ro o

Part I I .-I ro~woi*kers (J ourneymen)-

-.. ... .... . . .. . ...... ... ...

-... 13 0


20/25

20

1907.E x parteH . V. YUKAP,ThePresident.

i

s. d .Part 111.-Woodworkers and Painters (J ourney-men)-

Machinists, wood (except iig those workingshaping machines or Boult's carver or boringor mortising machine or cross-cut saw) ... g 6Men working shaping machine or Boult'scarver ... I . . ... ... I O 8Men working boring olr molrtising machine orcross-cut saw ... ... 8 o.. ...Carpenters (including timber marker) ... I O 0.Wheelwrights . . . . ... ... ... I O 0.Pattern-makers ... ... ... ... XI 0

Painters-brush hands 9 0Painters--;writers and liners ... ... I O 0... ... ...Part 1V.-Sundry (J ourneymen)-

Timber yardsmen.. ... ... ... 8 oEngine-drivers driving I st class engines ... 9 2Engine-drivers driving 2nd class engines ... 8 oEngine-drivers, with other work ... ... I O 0Part V .-Apprentices-

Rate, per week1st year ... ... ... ... 8 o2nd year ... ... . I . ... I 2 03rd year ... ... ... ... 16 o4th year ... ... ..* ... 20 05th year ' ... ... ... 1 .. 24 06th year (if any) ... ... ... 30 o7th year (if any) . . I ... ... 36 o

Part VI.-Boys (not apprenticed)-per dayUnder fifteen ... ... ... ... 2 0

15 to 16... . I . 1 . . ... ... z 616 to 17 *.. 3 017 to 18 .. *.. ... ... ... 3 618 to 19 4 019 to 20. . . s o20 to 21. . . ... ... ... ... 6 o

... ... ... ...

.. . ... ... ... ...... ... ... ...Part V1I.-Young Journeymen-

Class A.Rate: not less than two-thirds sf the minimum prescrifor journeymen. ~ ,


21/25

21Class B. 1907.E1; parteRate: not less fbr the first year than five-eighths, and for the H. v. MOKAY.second than three-fourths of the minimum prescribed for ThePresident.

journeymen.Part VIII.---Exception to Parts I to VI1.-Any old, slow, or infirm worker licensed to work at a lowerrate ( a ) by the Registrar of the Commonwealth Court ofConciliation and A rbitration, or (6) under sRction gg of thaFactories and Shops Act 1905 (No. 2 ) of Victoria (or anysubstitution therefor), if the licence be approved by thesaid Registrar.

Part IX .-Overtime--A t the rate of time and a quarter for two hours, time and ahalf for the next two hours, and double time afterwards.Double time on Sundays and Christmas Day, New Y earsDay, Gcod Friday, and Eight Hours Day.Overtime to be reckoned separately for each da,y from theusual time for beginning or ceasing work, and without re-gard to any time off on other days.

Part X .-Definitions.T he time expendedby lorry-drivers and carters before or after theusual time for beginning oar ceasing work, in feeding and attendingQ their horses is not to be regarded as overtime.( ourneyman means any person doing any of the work of anartisan as an employee, not being an apprentice or a young journey-an.A pprentice means (a) any person under 2 1 years bound by

nture for a term of years (not less than five or more than seven)learn the trade of an artisan; (6) any persoa who), on the 1st:mber, 1907, was bound as an apprentice by indenture for a, and who has attained, or will attain, the age of 21 yearsre the expiry of his term ; c) any person under 25 years who, on1st November, 1907, was learning any tr;ade as an unboundentice, and ivho has not had in the whole more than five yearsrience in the trade, and who becomes forthwith Aabound appren-ce for the balance of the five years.Y aunfjousneyrnm meansPClass (a) Any p r s m who hassrved

is time as apprentice, and who has not had more than one years,Class (8) F ar a period oif two years mlyAny person under 25, and noting an apprentice who on that date.was doing any of the work ofn arti san,i n the manufacture of m y of the articles referred to ine schedule to the Excise Tariff 1906.

saquent experience.m the 1st of Navember, 1907.


22/25

221907. T he formof the Order made was as follows:-Ex pnrteH. V. M U K A Y . I n the matter of the Excise Tariff Actand

I n the matter of the A pplication of HUGH ICTORM C K A Y ,Sunshine, Victoria,

BEFORETHE PRESIDENTF THE COMMONWEALTHOURTCONCILIATIONND ARBITRATION,RINCIPALEGISTRY.

Frzdej~,he 8th doy of November, 1907.Upon reading the application of the abovenamed H ughMcICay, dated the 30th A pril , and the list Ex. A , which

substituted at the request of the applicant for the list containthe said application, and upon reading athe two affdavits 0said Hugh V ictor RkKay, sworn and, filed herein on, theA pri l, 1907, and the 28th October, 1907, respectively; andhearing the evidence taken on oral examinaticm on the 7th, 8th,roth, I rth, 14th, I gth, 16th, I /th, 18th~zIst, aznd, 23rd,25th, 28th, 29th, goth, and 31st days otf October, 1907, onof the said applicant, and on behalf of the various tradeFermitted by me to appear on the said application, and uponing M r. Schutt, of counsel f or the applicant, and Mr. Duffy,and RiIr A rthur, of counsel folr the Agricultural ImplementSociety, the Amalgamated I ron M oulders Society, the AmalI ron Foundry Employees Society, the Amalgamated SocietyWorkers, the Tinsmiths and I ron Wsrkers Society, and thegamated Society of I ron Workers, and upon hearing Mr Sthe secretary of the Federated Saw M ill , T imber Y ard, and GeWood Workers Employees Associadion, and representing theassociation, and also the Amalgamated Society of Carpentersthe Painters, Paperhangers, and Decorators Society otf V icI , the President of the said Court, in exercise of the powerserred uFon me by the Excise Tarif 1906, declare that theditioas as to the remuneration of labour appearing in the schereinafter written and called T he Excise Tarif f StandaTime-w,ork, are fair and reasonable, for the purposes of theTa r i f 1906; .and that the cmditioas appearing in the saidEx. A, submitted to me by the applicant, are not fair and reasoiin so f ar as they fall below the said standard. A nd the appli

.or any oae or more of his employees (not k i ng less than.twentieth of the total number of the employees), or any uniother association of workers in any of the trades or occupreferred to in the said stindard, may apply for an y alterof, or addition to, the standard as omasion may require.

-

/


23/25

Strikers ... ... ... ... 7 6D lessers ... .. .... ... 7 6Drillers e. I . . ... ... 7 6Ironbenders ... ... ... ... 8 oM alleable iron annealers ... ... ... 8 oBelt cutters ... ... ... ... 8 30Furnacemen ... . . ... . L . 9 0Sheet ironworkers 9 0M achinists, i roi (other than fitters and turnersand including grinders) ... ... ... 9 0Fitters ... ... .*. ... *.. I O 0Turners ... ... ... ... 1 0 0M oulders (including coremakers) ... ... TO 0Blacksmiths ... ... ...

i

... ... ...I

... I O 0Part 111-Woodworkers and Painters (Journeymen).- Machinists, wood (excepting, those workingshaping machine, or Boults carver or boring

Men working shaping machine or Boults carver I OMen working boring or mortising machine or

or mortising machine, or cross-cue saw) .-. 9 6

rrm$cut saw ... ... ... ... 8 oCarpenters (including timber marker) ... I O 0Wheelwrights ... ... ... ... I O 0Pattern makers ... ... ...Painters-writers and liners ... ... I O 0Painters-brush hands ... ... ... 9 0

8

... I 1 070. 13

I

23S C H E D U L E H E R E I N B E F O R E R E F E R R E D TO.

T he Excise Tariff Standard for Time-work.1907.Ex parteE. V. MCEAY.

he following conditions as to the remuneration of labour arelared to be fai r and reasonable for the purposes of the Excise1906, for persons employed on time-work in the manufac-referred to in the Act, if (except as provided in Part I X .regard to lorry-drivers and carters), their hours of work do not

d eight hours per day, or 82 hours on five days in the week,44 hours on the sixth day, or if (except as aforesaid) there bee other similar distribution of hours adopted for the purpose ofring a weekly half-holiday on the basis of an eight hours day.he standard remains until altered. Rate

s. d.L abourers, unski lled (including furnacemensL abourers, skil led (including pullers-out) ... 7 6labourers, and lohy drivers and carters) ... 7 0


24/25

1907.Ex parte. H. V. BfCKAY.

24Part IV . Sundry (J our neymen).-

Timber yardsmen ... 1 . .Engine-drivers (with other work) ...Engine-drivers driving first-class enginesEngine-drivers driving second-class engines

I? art V.-Ay:prentices-

1 s t year .. . ...2nd year ,. . ...3rd year ... ...4th year ... ...5th year ... * a .6th year (if any) , 1 . .7th year (i f any) ...

Part VI.---Boys (not apprenticed)-

....

...,...............

-Under I 5 ... ... . I .I 5 to I6... ... ... ...16 to 17 ... ... ...17 to 18... ... ... I . .18 to 19 ... ... . a .19 to 2 0 . ~ . ... ... ...

...

..... ...0 lo 21. .. . ...

Pa.rt V I I -Y oung J ouriiwmen-

s. d .... 8 0,9 .2

, ... 8 o...

Rateper weeke . . 8 0... 16 o... I 2 0... 2 0 0... 34 0... 36 0

Per... 2... 233

. . I

.. .... 45... 6 0...

day6

6

0

0

00

Class A.-Rate: Not less than two-thirds of the miprescribed for journeymen.Class B.-Rate: Not less for the first year than five-eiand for the second than L hree-fourths of the minimuscribed for journeymen.

Part V II1.-Exception to Parts I to VI1.-Any old, slow, or infirm worker licensed to work at arate (a) by the Registrar of the Commonwealthof Conciliatioa and Arbsitration, or (6) under seof the Factories ajtzd Shops Act 1905 (No. 2 ) of(or any substitution thereof), if the licence be aby th; said Registrar.

Part 1X.-Overtime-A t the rate of time aiid a quarter for two hours, time

half for the next two hours, and double time afterDouble time 0111 Sunda,ys and Christmas Day,Y ear's Day, Good Friday, and Eight Hours


25/25

25Overtime to be reckoned separately for each day fromout regard to any time of f on other days. T he time ex-pended by lorry drivers and casters before or after theusual time for beginning or ceasing work in feeding andattending to their horses is not to be regarded as over-time.

1907.the usual time for beginning or ceasing work, and with- Ea. pcurte. M U K A Y .

X .-Definitions- ourneymanmeans any person doing any of the work of

an artisan as an employee, not being an apprentice oryoung journeyman,

A pprentice means-( a ) Any person under 21 years bound by indenture foi

a term of years (not less than five or more thanseven) to learn the trade of an artisan.( B ) Any person who on the 1st November, 1907, was

bound as an apprentice by indenture for a term,and who has attained, OE will attain, the ageof 21 years, before the expiry of his term.

(6) Any person under 25 years who on the 1st Novem-ber, 1907, was learning any trade as an un-bound apprentice, and who has not had in thewhole more than five years experience in thetrade, and who becomes forthwith a boundapprentice fosr the balance of the five years.

Y oung journeyman means-Class ( a ) Any person who has served his time asapprentice, and who has not had more than

one years subsequent experience.Class (6) (For a period of two yeam only from the

1s t of Notvember, 1907). Any person under 25and not being an apprentice, w b on that datemy of the work of an artisan iii there of any of the artZles referred to

in the schedGle to the Excise Tari f f 1906*d the 8th day of November; 1907.

HIT.3. HIGGINS, J .,=m President of the said Court.Industrial Registrar.A . &I. STEWART,

itor for Applicant : G. Skaw, junr., iS4elbourne.

Harvester Judgemenet

Documents