NON-UNION LABOUR?

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 246, 17 October 1929, Page 8

NON-UNION LABOUR?

CLAIM FOR PENALTY. QUESTION OF RESPONSIBILITY ACTION BROUGHT BY CARPENTERS.

Argument that the wrong party was being sued was advanced on behalf of the Palmer Ward Construction Company (N.Z.), Ltd., when a claim was made against it in the Magistrate's Court this morning by the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners for a penalty of £10 in respect to an alleged breach of the award. The plaintiff society declared that the company had failed to notify in writing within the specified time of three days that it had engaged throe non-unionists. For the company, Mr. If. Grcsham slated that in connection with the job complained of a man named Thorn had a straight out contract with the company. It was therefore not required to notify the union that Thoiu had employed non-unionists. The' secretary of the uiiTbn (Mr. T. Bloodworth) said that Thoin had not been cited as a party to the award, as when it was last framed he was an undischarged bankrupt. in support of the claim, Mr. W. 11. Tuck said that Thorn, a month after the non-unionists were found working on a job at Parnell, paid thoir entrance fees to the union. On the job a notice designated him as " building superintendent" for the Palmer Ward Construction Co., and he actually engaged men at the oJlice (if the company. The application for the building permit was put through (lie city council under the name of the company and V. 11. Thom, superintendent. Mr. Gresham handed in a contract with the company signed by Thorn. Mr. Tuck: That create? another difficulty, as it is a contract for labour | only. One of the difficulties in this case is fliat Thoni is aa undischarged bankrupt. (Proceeding.)