TRAMWAYS BILL.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20334, 5 September 1931, Page 17

TRAMWAYS BILL.

—+- — OJJSCIIOS BY UPPER HOUSE. fljfty SIX SUPPORTERS. Ou, PA»UAM*niakt REPORT®*.] WELLINGTON", September 4. fMfug s riiort discussion, the Legislar'faatil this afternoon rejected, by %eto# to «*> the Christchurch TramDistrict Amendment Bill, which "jLjte bring the employees of the Tramways under Arbitraawards. (L jUI was is the bands of the Eton. A L gr"l>i' who, in moving the second said all other tramway emNew Zealand were under ArGSjwi Court awards, and it was only \TIZ.a proper that the Christchurch I *jLZq BI fhould enjoy the same condi--2T especially as both the men and jgSttßd tad for many years been unJt* impression that the men were jjjtetke Court. TSjfcjtt*. Q. Witty said he favoured fj|§#®-table conferences between the fjyLi** and men because they mining tie friction between the two parIt would be all right so long as MB were under the leadership of like Mr H. T. Armstrong, who ifltta secretary of the Union for Br'years, but there had been a tenSr lor unruly leaders to cause disputes 'which proved detrimental to of the people of Christju* A Matter of Principle. Efta Hon. M. Fagan supported the NRpKause it was a matter of prin|||cad common justice that the men Kj|| lie placed under the same condiHjif'ai those engaged in similar occuBUmitt other parts of New Zealand. |Hm' reiterated the fact that for a IBBBLr of years the conditions of emWrmuA ia the Christchurch Tramways Mliia laid down by the Arbitration jad it was only when the manaBpPMi that the Board was not really ■Km the Court that trouble had uSb 'Both aides had been quite conD||jlfmder the Court, and there was fin why they should not revert to Hp «rder as'sought in the Bill. KKSon. W. Earnshaw said it was IHCMO of bias, but one of principle. Bwfcmt majority of tramwaymen in HffiPwland were under the Arbitra-. IfifclJoß. G. J. Garland said one of lUßpii* for the Bill was the anxiety K' wen to secure preference to Hp- which was providedin most HHfSMt • Court awards and "which HHptaental to industrial harmony. ■Hpyeated what be termed the sorHb attempt to'obtain this by Hf Hbuacea of tbe Board. Hpoa. L. M. Isitt said the msn apMgjuy wanted. the Bill so that they MKpplv to the Court for increased Hp Already the Christchurch Tram■Hrcre experiencing adverse times, j ■■was just a question whether they Hbe able to remain financially ■■■Mr increase iirwages would ISHftdd to ttweoet of ipnning tf« HHnough be would be the last fHHHE.the men to work for low thfak the was Carrington supported ground that it .involved reply, said the Bill was SHHpag something which men in other parts of being taken on the Bill was defeated by Hp£<- Those who voted for Thomas Sidey, the MBBpuman, the Hon. W. EarnCL J." Carrington, the HHHHKSand* the' Bon. G. J. been twice passed by Representatives, once different Farit has been unanity" the Local Bills ComHHnl probably be brought according to Mr J. -Mein the Lower House, by .the House for the ■■■■Pilb sent to the Council, ■■■MbtwQl most likely adopt of passing any ' thrice passed the it to be