TRIBUNAL PROPOSED FOR DISPUTE
ACCEPTANCE BY UNION Order Of Reference To Be Decided • Sittings To Begin Within ■ A Week (P-A.) Auckland, today. Government proposals for the settlement of the Auckland waterfront trouble, involving the formation of a tribunal to investigate the Mountpark dispute and a return to normal work on all ships except the Mountpark, have been accepted by the New Zealand Waterside Worker's Union.
This was announced on Saturday by the Minister of Labour, Mr McLagan, who said the union's acceptance was subject to agreement being reached on the order of reference for the tribunal. The Government has prepared a proposed order and the union's national executive will begin work en its proposals today. The union has asked that normal work should be resumed today on all ships not directly involved in the dispute. If a resolution on these lines is approved by a special stop-work meeting of the Auckland branch this morning, the Waterfront Industry Commission will be immediately requested to .allocate labour for ail vessels excepting the Mountpark, but including the idle sugar shin Broorrroark.
t Mr McLagan, however, has insisted that this course must be taken tomorrow, after the order of reference has boon settled. No general call for labour will, therefore, be' made today. The tribunal will bcgin its sittings within a week. to 13. Detailed results are as follows: Senior: Katikati A 13 v. St. Mary's O.G. G; Matakana 16 v. Katikati'B 11; Rainstors 13 v. Hartleys 11; Rangataua East 11 v. Batten A 8; Mansfield A 14 v. Ohuki 13.
Rovers A 18 v. College A 13; United Al2 v. Mount-A 5; College B 15 v. Hartleys 10; McKcnzies 12 v. Waikare 10; Mount B 4 drew with United B 4.
Katikati A 11 v. Kmtoa 6; To Puna 10 v. Maori O.G. 7; Rovers Junior 10 v. Katikati B 6; Rangataua 17 v. Nightingales 3; Rutherford A 7 v. Tainui 6.
College B 11 v. Rainstcrs 7; Hartleys 13 v. Rovers Junior 4; Rovers A 20 v. United A 8; Fr'eyberg A 18 v. Katikati B 4: Matakana 11 v. Rangataua 10; Waikare 17 v. Meteor 1.
Junior: Te Puna 12 v. Freyberg B 6; Matakana 10 v. Batten B 8; Bethlehem A 14 v. Primary A (i; Rutherford B 8 v. Mansfield B 7; Tauriko 12 v. Otumoctai 1. Bethlehem B 12 v. Bethlehem C 1; Primary B 4 v. Primary C 3: Papamoa Maori 8 v. Mount Maunganui 2; Primary D 12 v. Papamoa 1.
Te Puna 12 v. Rutherford B 3; Freyberg B 8 v. Matakana 6: Bethlehem A 15 v. Batten B 5; St. Mary's 1.7 v. Primary A 5. Bethlehem B 17 v. Tauriko 3; Primary B 11 v. Bethlehem C 1: Papamoa Maori 12 v. Primary C 6; Mount Mnunganui 12 v. Papamoa 1; Primary D 6 v. Otumoetai 1.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/BOPT19480712.2.24
Bibliographic details
Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXVI, Issue 14720, 12 July 1948, Page 3
Word Count
474TRIBUNAL PROPOSED FOR DISPUTE Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LXXVI, Issue 14720, 12 July 1948, Page 3
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the Bay of Plenty Times. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.