TRAMWAY APPEAL BOARD.

Auckland Star, Volume L, Issue 221, 17 September 1919, Page 13

TRAMWAY APPEAL BOARD.

DISMISSAL OF CONDUCTOR UPHELD. XO DISHONEST INTENTIONS. Tlie appeal by George ChristofT against dismissal by "the Auckland Tramway Company was concluded in the auxiliary Court room veeterday afternoon. The Tramway Appeal Board consisted of Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M., Mr. W. 11. Holdsworth (for the Corporation), and Mr. A. G. Barnes for the Union. The appellant was represented by Mr. Allan Moody on behalf of the Tramway Union. Mr. H. Rogenson appeared for the Corporation. In announcing the finding of the Board, the chairman said as the matter I was really a question of fact there was no need to reserve decision. The appellant was dismissed for failing to issue tickets to passengers and also for failing to collect fares from passengers who had left the car without paying. It was not denied that those things had happened. The appellant's case was that there was no intention on his part not to issue the tickets, and that failure to collect thb fares in the other case was due to his being engaged at the opposite end of the car at the time. The Board held appellant could not be excused altogether. He admitted he did not tear off the tickets before he was spoken to by the traffic manager. That was a breach of the regulations which were essential to the whole working of the company, otherwise there would be nf> check. On the second ground of passengers -getting out before their fares were collected, it was pointed out that there were only 33 in the car at the time. Had appellant been a new hand it might have been excusable, but he had three years' experience in the service of the company, and on his own admission he had failed on both grounds. It had been 6hown that appellant had a clean record sheet, and the Board acquitted him of any dishonest intention in not having issued the tickets, but held there was either very srrave carelessness or serious incompetence, which made it practically impossible for the company to continue to employ him. Mr. Cutten said he considered the company was fully justified in its action, and the appeal must be dismissed.

Mr. Holdisworth concurred with the chairman.

Mr. Barnes said that in view of appellanfe previous good character, and the fact that there was no dishonest intention, he considered the man might have been punished otherwise, without being dismissed.