MEMBERSHIP OF UNION

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22375, 12 April 1938, Page 5

MEMBERSHIP OF UNION

WORKING SHAREHOLDERS IN MINE EXEMPT MAGISTRATE GIVES JUDGMENT FOR COMPANY (yUSt MiOCIATIOW TK-»0»AM.) NELSON, April 11. A decision that the *?*«*"»,£,,,*!! award was to exonerate shareholders of the company from being compelled to become members of the workers union was given by Mr T. E. Maunsell iSM.. in a reserved judgment m the case of the Inspector-of Awards v. Puponga Coal Mine, Ltd. The Magistrate said: "The inspector claims a penalty for alleged breach of award by the company, in that it is employing in the mine four persons who are not for the time being members of the union, there being members of the union bound by the award •available and ready. to j performi the particular work required to be done. A strike was. entered upon by the workers recently, as a result of which several of them were not re-engaged. "At this time there was no award, but one came into force on August 27, 1937. on October 13. Four men were presented to the mine manager by the Inspector of Awards. They had previously been employed at the mine. The mine manager refusedito employ them, although they were unionists, as this involved dismissing four other men who, although not unionists, are shareholders. Clause 10 makes it obligatory for the company to give preference to unionists. Award Quoted "It is contended for the defence, however, that clause 10 must be read subject to clause 12 of the award, the relevant part of which reads as follows: 'The company shall be entitled to employ the same number of shareholders <6) as was employed at the beginning of December, 1936, and to maintain the working shareholder strength at six. Working shareholders may be employed at the same classes of work as they were in the habit of performing before December, 1936.' "The inspector contends that, notwithstanding this clause, working shareholders must join the union. The following is extracted from Halsbury's 'Laws of England,' vol. 10. p. 258: *lt is a rule of construction applicable to all written instruments that the instrument must be-construed as a whole in order to ascertain the true meaning of its several clauses and the words of each clause must be so interpreted as to bring them into harmony with the other provisions of the instrument. If that interpretation does no violence to the meaning of which they are naturally susceptible, effect must as far as possible be given to every word and every clause.' • "Some effect must therefore be given to clause 12. In my opinion, it is abundantly clear that it is a qualification or an exception to the provisions of clause 10. It purports to confer upon a company a certain privilege.

I Effect of Clause "The only possible effect the clause can have is that it entitles a company to continue to employ the shareholders, although they are not unionists. If I hold that the working shareholders must be unionists, then in effect I hold the clause to be nugatory.

"During the hearing, in reply to me, the inspector conceded that he was

unable to show that clause 12 conferred any benefit on the company whatever if his contention is adopted. That it was intended to confer a privilege is clear. It seems to me that for shareholders to be compelled to become members of the workers' union would be a position steeped in incongruity, and it is, I think, the intention of the award to exonerate the company from being in such a position. "Moreover, clause 12 goes on to say that any shareholder who may transfer, his shares in a company shall relinquish his right of employment thereby. That shows that the employment of shareholders depends upon their remaining shareholders and not upon their joining the union." Judgment wu given for the defendant, j