RATIONING OF TRAMWAYMEN

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21083, 7 February 1934, Page 15

RATIONING OF TRAMWAYMEN

* BOARD'S REFUSAL TO HEAR DEPUTATION VOTING AT UNION MEETING The refusal of the Christchurch Tramway Board to hear a deputation representing 62 employees of the traffic department on the subject of voting at a meeting of the Tramway Employees', Union has aroused indignation among a section of the traffic staff.

These men claim that employees of other departments who would not be affected by the rationing should not have been allowed to vote on the issue at the union meeting, and they wished to place that view before the board. The voting, done by a show of hands, had included many men on staffs other than the traffic staff; had the vote been confined to the traffic men the proposal probably would not have been carried.

The men who were dissatisfied with t,he voting appointed a deputation of two to wait on the board with a petition signed by 62 of the traffic employees. The petition asked the board to investigate the means by which the majority vote was secured and to have the rationing equally divided over the whole of the staff, or have the vote confined to the traffic staff. When the deputation was refused a hearing it had been told, one man said, that the request should have been made through the union. But the men held that it would be absolutely useless to try to put the matter through the union, as the union was opposed to it. The petitioners considered that the board should have received the deputation. They had decided that they would not allow the matter to rest as it was at present. REPLY MADE BY CHAIRMAN GOAKD DEALING WITH UNION AS A WHOLE Giving an explanation of the Tramway Board's refusal to hear a deputation from a section of the employees concerning the rationing proposal, the chairman (Mr J. K. Archer) said that in the opinion of the board all negotiations affecting wages, hours, and conditions of the men should be conducted between the board and the union as a whole. The men were given a full explanation of the board's refusal, he said.

"It was reported to the board that 61 men had signed a petition, asking the board to receive a deputation," said Mr Archer. "Previous to that request, the board had made investigations, and found that the voting on the rationing scheme was 114 to 42.

"It also found that a number of men at the union meeting refrained from voting, because they were not members of the traffic department.

The board, moreover, was assured by an official of the union that there was only one union, and that every member had a right to vote on any issue that was raised. We have also received information that a number of men not in the traffic department wish to share in the rationing because they are anxious to make some sacrifice in the interests of the men who are still out of employment.

"The reasons why the board would not receive the deputation were given to the men, or should have been given, by the general manager. The position is that the board has an agreement with the union, and feels that any negotiations concerning the wages, hours, or conditions of the men should be conducted with the union, and not with any individual or group of union members.

"The board sent out an explanation to the men to that effect, and suggested to the deputation that the right procedure would be to lodge a notice of motion with the union that' the previous motion be rescinded, which would automatically reopen the whole question. "As for the complaint about their having been kept waiting an hour, it is simply mischievous for employees of the board to try to foster ill-feeling between the board and its employees, or any portion of them. As far as I am concerned, I want the relations between the board and its employees to be as friendly as possible.

"The fact is that the board held two meetings yesterday. First of all it sat in open board, and there was •no request before it that a deputation be heard. So, of course, the agenda paper had to be exhausted before the representations of these men could even be considered. Later, when the board sat as a works and traffic committee, the application was discussed at length, and a decision was reached, as I have said, that such a request must come to the board from the union as a whole." EXTENSION OF RATIONING The Christchurch Tramway Board, sitting as the works and traffic committee, has decided to ' extend the existing scheme of rationing work amongst members of the traffic staff. The decision of the committee has yet to be confirmed by the board, and this' it is anticipated it will do at its next meeting. The Christo-hurch Tramway Employees* Union, in requesting that the rationing system should be extended, asked that 16 men who lost their jobs through the strike should be reemployed. The committee has decided to recommend that 12 of the men should be given work. ; .