COALMINERS' DISPUTE.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 123, 25 May 1923, Page 4

COALMINERS' DISPUTE.

j CO_.FER---.C_- AT HIKTXRA-fGI. j PARTIES FAIL TO AGREE. j The following attended the conference at Hikurangi yesterday re the dispute with the coal miners:—Owners' representatives were Messrs. J. D. Douglas, A. H. Taylor (Hikurangi Coal Company), IJ. Davidson, R. Nelson (Wilson's Collieries), J. Bishop (secretary of the Coalmine Owners' Federation). Representing the Miners' Union were Messrs. W. H. Smith (member of the executive of the Xew Zealand Miners' Federation), R. Xesbit (president, Hikurangi Miners' Union), J. Wilson (secretary of the union), and W. Gilmour (member of the executive). Interviewed to-day on the subject of the Hikurangi coal-mining dispute, the secretary of the Xew Zealand Coal miners' Association, Mr. T. O. Bishop, made the following statement: —"The Arbitration Court Award, made in December, 1021, for the Hikurangi district, did not provide for the new mine which has recently been opened by the Hikurangi Coal Company; it is, therefore, ) necessary* that an agreement on the subject of rates and working conditions for '• this mine should 'be entered into between the company and the Hikurangi Miners* j Union. The company lia9 endeavoured !to discuss proposals for such an agree- , ment with representatives of the union during the past few weeks, and yesterday I attended the conference with representatives of the union -with this object. Prior to the conference the union had filed a dispute under the Labour Disputes Investigation Act, and in their proposals they had embodied the following clause: ' In the event of the company having to shorten hands the work shall be shared if possible, failing this the men to be cavilled out, union officials to be present at such cavil.' When the conference was opened the president of the union stated that before proceeding to discuss any agreement for the Hikurangi Company's new mine the union representatives were instructed to raise the question of tlie dismissal of seven men at an adjoining property, which had not been in accordance with the established custom of tho district, namely, that when it is found necessary to shorten hands at a mine the last men employed shall be the first put off. They also -raised objection to tlie transference of men from the Hikurangi Company's old mine to the new mine. As the proprietors of the mine first referred to, at which seven men, including the union president, have recently been dismissed, are not members of the Coal Owners' Association, I was unable to deal in any way with the first point raised; and I declined to agree with the Union's proposal as to the method of selecting which men should be transferred from tbe Hikurangi Company's old mine, owing to the working out of'places. The question was also rai-ed as to the dismissal from the Hikurangi Company's : employment of a married man. a returned soldier whose work as a winch driver had ceased to be necessary. To I overcome the difficulty regarding this ; , man's dismissal, and 'in regard aI« transference of men from tiie old mine'i | to the new mine, r submitted the follow- ! I ln - proposal to the union representative I ' m writing: — j (1) Owing to want of places in the old ' ; mine, it is essential that five men be I , transferred to the new mine immediately. (_) These five men shall be the i five ,ast comers, |3) Charlton will be! tound employment on the surface while ' such is available. (4) Xo other men! i will be transferred from the old mine to | the new mine until the next cavil, when j both mines will be put into one ' cavil i provided that, for pillar working the , management shall have the right to | reject men who are considered l.nsuit- ' ; : ahle. I \ I Thi* proposal was submitted to a full ' meeting of the Miners" Union, after I ' : which the representatives returned to the ' : , conference and stated that they wore in- I • structed by the union members' that they I j were not to accept the proposal or to : ' enter ,„to any discussion of the new mine I 1 j agreement until the companies agreed to , j the union s proposed method of aelectinsr j men to be discharged in case of a short! ' 1 j ening of hands being necessary. The conference therefore reached a deadlock the union representative intimating that they would bod a further full meetC ot the union this morning to consider what action they would take. ■' From the foregoing it will'be clear' hat the real cause ot tbe trpuM. i« I the dismissal of seven men from Messrs Foott and Doel's mine, and the demand! of the union that these men shall be reinstated and that the men to be di«charged shall he selected by ballot. ' There is really no dispute 'with the, Hikurangi Company or Wilson's Collieries. Ltd.. yet the mines of' both L these companies are idle. i' In the offer which f made on behalf . of the Hikurangi Company. I went as s far as it was possible to go, in the hope i of effecting a settlement. The union's I demand that men to be dispensed with b should be balloted out or that, alter- £ natively, the work should be shared I with all employees, cannot possibly be conceded. It is inconceivable that' the I manager of any business would surrender his right to select his own employees, nnd this applies in coal mining to a greater degree than in almost another business, owing to the nature of the work and the necessity of selecting .men qualified by experience for the carrying on of the mining operations. Ihe interests of safety alone are quite c sufficient reason for the refusal of the ( men's demand. What Will b e the Otlt- I g come of the trouble depends entirely J upon the action which the men now f decide to take.