SENIORITY AND EFFICIENCY.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 60, 12 March 1923, Page 5

SENIORITY AND EFFICIENCY.

THE TRAMWAY APPEALS. ALL SEVEN DISMISSED. The Auckland Tramway Appeal Board! gave its decision this morning at the Magistrate's Court in the ap-peals made by seven employees of the Auckland City Tramways against the appointment, of certain traffic inspectors. Mr. E. t'. Cut ten, S.M.. was chairman, Mr. C XHutchisoii represented the employers, and Mr. J. -I. Nixon, the employees. The grounds of the appeal were that the appellants were senior in the service to the men appointed, and that, they bad equal qualitications. Mr. J. Stanton represented the City Council, and Mr. .1. J. Sullivan appeared for the appellants. At the hearing, the latter raised tiepoint that the examinations of candidates had been conducted loosely, men being allowed to walk out of the room, and ret urn again. THE FINDING. Mr. Cufteii said tho Hoard had considered the appeals and had arrived at the happy result of a unanimous decision. The Board had come to the decision that not one of the appeals could ihe sustained. It seemed to the Board | that the appellants had been influenced in making their appeals by the old rule, which had apparently remained fixed in their minds. The new rule however, was that promotion was by efficiency, and not by seniority. Mr. Cutten said he was going to make 2 few remarks about, that new rule, which were not necessarily the opinion of his colleagues on the Board. As chairman of the Post and Telegraph Appeal Board, he had a good deal of experience of the working of the rule of promotions by efficiency, and he must say that, it was in the interests of 'he men themselves. Promotion by t'lliciency had given remarkably better results, and was very much more in I he interests of the employees than promo tions by seniority. Anyone who took the trouble io carefully consider the matter must realise the advantage of the new rule. Under the rule that promotion was by seniority, all that a man had to do was *o be careful not. to break the ! regulations, and he would steadily move upwards in the service. Just behind him might be another man. who wax highh efficient, who gave his whole time and energy to the service, and yet he could not be promoted over "'he head of hii senior. Promotion by efficiency produced much better results, and was an advantage not only to the employers but to t lie employees. I' was a matter of very great importance to the men to have thoroughly efficient, officers to turn to in times of difficulty and fee) sure of rccch - ing fair, equitable -reatment. .Mr. Cutten said to go back lo de actual decision of the members of the Hoard, he would jiisrt like to say that blip only appeal to which they had to giv great, thought was that, of W. A. Donald- : son, but even in his ca«p the Board were j satisfied t'liat the general manager. Mr. |A. E. Ford, gave the most careful con sidera.tion *o the matter. The Board wen' satisfied that Mr. Ford was in a ■ better position to arrive at. a decision than the members were. Mr. Ford's decision on Donaldson's application therefore stood. All the apjieaN would '.herefore lie dismissed. Mr. Sullivan asked if the Board intended to make any pronouncement re garding the manner in which t iie examinations of the applicants wejv • held? | Mr. Cutten said 'lie Hoard carefully considered that also, and came to the 3 conclusion that Mr. Ford waw in a belter T position to judge in that mater also. i —