CONCILIATION BOARD.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 10032, 10 May 1898, Page 3

CONCILIATION BOARD.

THE BUILDING TRADE,

The Conciliation Board met at the Provincial Council Chambers yesterday in the matter of the Canterbury Carpenters and Joiners' Union v Builders , Association and A. Palmer. Present—Messrs W. H. Cooper (chairman), W. Williams, J. Chalmers, T. Gapes and J. Grieg. Before the proceedings commenced a letter was read T. G. Russell, who wrote that neither the Builders and Contractors , Association nor Mi , Palmer intended to appear, as the incident being used as a basis of tho dispute did not, in the opinion of his clients constitute a cause for invoking the good offices of the Board of Conciliation. If Mr Palmer had committed a breach of the award of the Arbitration Court, tho Conciliation Board was not the proper authority to consider the question. The matter must be dealt with by the Court entrusted under the statute with the enforcement of all awards made by the Arbitration Court.

The reference to the Board «as from the Amalgamated Socioty of Carpenters and Joiners and the Canterbury Carpenters' and Joine.es' Association, and complained that on March 19th A. Palmer discharged A. Hard;--, of the former, and H. Went, of the latter Union, and retained in his employ non-unionists in preference. For this breach of the award of the Arbitration Court the Union claimed £10.

Mr Talbot submitted that under the Act he was compelled to bring the matter first before the Conciliation Board.

Messrs Gapes and Greig were of the opinion that the Board was not the proper authority to hear the case, which should come before a recognised Court of law. Messrs Williams and Chalmers pointed out that the Union were taking the preliminary action provided for them by the Act and were seeking to establish the principle of the employment of Unionists in preference to non-Unionists.

After some discussion, the Board, owing to a difference of opinion as to whether it had power or not to hear the retired to consider the position. Upon the Board resuming after half-an-hour's consideration, the Chairman said the Board had decided that it had not power to .hear the dispute under the existing rules. As set out in the plaint, the sum of £10 waa claimed as damages, and by the rules the Board had no power to make any damages. It would be a serious injustice for the defendant if the Board were to change the reference without giving him due notice. Mr Talbot asked if the amount were struck out, would the Board be prepared to hear the case ?

The Chairman said he thought so, but he was not prepared to pledge the members to any opinion.

Mr Talbot asked what was the earliest time at which the Board would be prepared to hear it.

The Chairman said the Board met again on the 19th.

Mr Talbot said he wished to lodge an objection to the reception of the letter by Mr Russell, which had no statue.

The Chairman said the Board had not based their opinion on the letter.

The Board then adjourned.