NGAHERE DREDGE DISPUTE

Press, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23194, 4 December 1940, Page 8

NGAHERE DREDGE DISPUTE

MR WEBB CRITICISED BY TRADES COUNCIL APPEAL TO WORKERS FOR SUPPORT [From Our Own Reporter.] GREYMOUTH, December 3. Full details of the dispute which has stopped work at the Ngahere gold, dredge since the King’s Bifthday, November 25, have been referred by the West Coast Trades and Labour Council to the New Zealand Federation of Labour, the national executive of which will meet at Wellington to-morrow. The union’s case will be presented by a representative from the West Coast. An allegation that the onus for the protraction of the dispute was on the Minister for Labour (the Hon, P. C. Webb) and the company is made in a statement issued by the West Coast Trades and Labour Council. No further developments have occurred in the dispute. In an appeal to workers the Trades and Labour Council has issued the following statement: “This council is of the definite opinion that the action of the Ngahere Company in locking-out the men was a distinct breach of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, and it condemns such action in the strongest manner possible. We ask all unionists on the West Coast to give all possible financial and moral support for the men. “The statement of Mr C. C. Davis, chairman of directors of the company, that he has made every possible effort to end (he dispute will not stand analysis. He did not inform Mr Webb that.he told union and Trades and Labour Council representatives in the presence of a Labour Department official (who attended at the request of both parties to act as independent chairman if so required) that he did not ‘give a hoot’ if the dredge did not start until after Christmas; and he did not mention that' he wanted to settle the question of payment by the toss of a coin. “The whole dispute could, and should have been settled on the Monday evening when .the union asked for intervention by Mr Webb on the receipt of a notice dismissing the men. The onus for -the protraction of this dispute is on the Minister for Labour and the company. “We appeal to all unionists to protest against the company’s action and would point out that the action of a member of the War Council In holding up the production of such an important commodity as gold at the preent time is deplorable.” SUPPORT COMMITTEE S STATEMENT EXCEPTION TAKEN TO ARTICLE IN “ THE PRESS ” [From Our Own Reporter.] GREYMOUTH, December 3. A statement "issued by the support committee for the locked-out Ngahere dredge workers, comprising members of the Trades and Labour Council and the Westland Gold Dredge Workers’ Union,” (o-day states; “Particular exception is taken to the misleading statements made in a leading article in ‘The Press’ to-day. Facilities for the publication of the true facts have always been available from the office of the Dredge Workers’ Union, obviating the necessity for the appearance of distorted statements. “For dredge workers or others who have had the opportunity of hearing the case explained, the statement that an agreement exists between the company and its employees is obviously untrue, and we challenge even the Ngahere employers to produce such a document. The article goes on to say that the demands of the men arc impudent. but without arming himself with all the available data, which the

leader-writer apparently has not done, it is 'difficult to imagine how he » competent to judge the facts. “It is further stated that the m e “ refusing to return to work means tnav they are flouting the authority of P® Minister for Labour; but considering the fact that the union has receives no such order from the Governmen this assertion must also be placed the guesswork category. The men consider that their employers are on sink and clnirr] that as strikers the em P2I ers should return to work and suite any, financial loss accruing. Were w men to resume work without a guara tee of wages this would mean l“ at ..z: fl strikers were being paid for the un\ they had lost through their own actio Hence, the editor's suggestion as impudence is only applicable to m employers. . h4 “There is no parallel between 1 case of the Waikato miners, who P sibly had an agreement with their e ployers to work statutory holidays,» the Ngahere dredge workers who d nitely had no such agreement, * thermore, we have heard of no ou case where an employer has travel* 145 miles ostensibly to settle a , oute and then declare ‘that he “id give a hoot 1 whether operations co ■ menced or not.”