A LOCK-OUT?

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 156, 3 July 1936, Page 8

A LOCK-OUT?

ECHO OF DISMISSALS. CLAIM MADE BY UNIONISTS. CARRYING FIRM'S DRIVERS. As a further development of the dismissal by a city carrying firm of a number of ito. employees, allegedly because of inability to pay the 1931 standard of wages, the Auckland Drivers' Union, in addition to bringing the matter before the notice of the Minister of Labour, the Hon. H. T. Armstrong, claims that the firm's action constitutes a lock-out. The union's contention is based on section 122 of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, 1025, which reads: "In this Act the term 'lock-out' means the act of an employer in closing his place of business or suspending or discontinuing his business or any branch thereof—(a) with intent to compel or induce any worker to agree to terms of employment, or comply with any demands made upon them by the said or any other employer; or (b) with intent to cause loss or inconvenience to the workers employed by him or to any of them; or (c) with intent to incite, aid. abet, instigate or procure any other lock-out; or (d) with intent to assist any other employer to compel or induce any workers to agree to terms of employment or comply with any demands made by him." In its letter to the Minister, the union alleges that the carrying firm concerned called its drivers together and told them that if they would not enter into an agreement to sign a document to work for less than the ruling rates of pay, it would dispense with their services. The men, it is added, declined to sign or agree to any such arrangements, and consequently they were discharged. "We contend that-under the Act the employer brings himself under the provisions of the Act dealing with lockouts. We have communicated with the local Labour Department suggesting that the employer should be prosecuted, and, in view of the attempt of several employers to intimidate their employees on similar lines, we are anxious that the matter should be dealt with as urgently as possible. We would be pleased to have your assistance in this direction."

The communication with the officer in charge of the Labour Department states that under section 122 of the I.C. and A. Act the union claims that the action of the firm in dismissing its drivers "for the reason that the employers were not prepared to pay the 1031 rates of wages, which according to the Prime Minister will be made retrospective by intended legislation, constitutes a lockout." In urging that the matter should receive the Department's immediate attention, the union declares that it has statements signed by ten ex-employees of the firm stating that the reason for their dismissal is that outlined.

The Act provides a substantial penalty for a lock-out, the matter being covered by a sub-section of Section 123, which reads as follows: "When a lockout takes place in any industry, every employer who is, or becomes a party to the lock-out and who is at the commencement. of the lock-out bound by an award or industrial agreement affecting that industry, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding £500."

While drivers in recent years have not possessed an award or agreement, it is submitted by the union that the order restoring wages to the 1931 level will automatically bring them under the award whjeli was previously in force.