TRAMWAY BOARD OF APPEAL.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14600, 26 February 1913, Page 7

TRAMWAY BOARD OF APPEAL.

A SHED HAND'S CASE. The Tramway Board of Appeal, con sisting of Mr T. A. B, Bailey, S.M., Mr J. A. Frostick (representing the employers), and Mr Georgo Lomas (representing the employees), sat yesterday afternoon to hear the appeal of E. M. Blako, a shed hand, who alleged unreasonable failure to promote. Mr Anthony appealed for the Christchurch Tramway Board and Mr Hiram Hunter for the appellant. The ground of tlio appeal was that G. Lumsden was appointed car equipment adjuster over appellant Mr Hunter applied to amend the appeal by the substitution of the name of G. Ford, who subsequently took Lumsden. place. Mr Anthony said that ho had no objection, provided that the appeal as affecting Lumsden was withdrawn, Mr Hunter said that it was dropped as regards Lumsden. The grounds ot appeal were amended. Mr Hunter said that Clause lOA'of. the award provided that in promoting employees preference shall bo given to employees in the department concerned subject.to seniority, suitability, and capability of tho employee concerned. Lumsden, who was an outsider, was ap- ' pointed car equipment adjuster in December last, but was replaced byj_.ru, I who was transferred from tho night shift to the day shift. Both Lumsden and Ford wero brought in from outside, and were nob previously in the I employ of the respondent, and pos j sessed no special knowledge of the j work Appellant had been in the Board's employment for four and a half years, and had experience of car equipment adjustment, and was suitablo and capable, and had a good record. He called evidence. E. M. Blake, appellant, and other employees gavo evidence. Mr Anthony said that the proceedings raised the important point of tho Board to appoint whoever its executive officers recommended. Proceeding he argued that tho onus to show unreasonableness was upon the appellant and he did not think it was competent for the Appeal Board to interfere with the internal management of the Tramway Board which was tho solo judge of the ability and suitability of the men promoted. It would be a pernicious principal in promotion to positions of car adjusters to insist on seniority. 1 Owing to the fact that the Tramway Board was running hill trams necessitating very careful examination of tho cars, it was necessary to raise the standard of efficiency amongst car adjusters. Two cases had occurred of the work of adjusters not being in order which was discovered beforo tho cars went on the tracks, but it showed the necessity for raising the standard of efficiency. He called: Georgo Thomas Booth, chairman of tho Christchurch Tramway Board, who stated that it was obvious that tho safety of tho public depended to a very largeextent on the way the car adjusters did their work, and consequently the Board now demanded a higher state of efficiency from them as compared with somo years ago when the Board was not able to make the selection that is now possible. A good deal of further evidence was heard. The Board will consider its decision and announce it later.