MANPOWER IN INDUSTRY

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23818, 11 December 1942, Page 7

MANPOWER IN INDUSTRY

♦ APPEALS AGAINST DIRECTIONS

COMMITTEE’S DECISIONS

"Unless firms are prepared to support the direction, I propose to withdraw it when an appeal is made,” said the Manpower Officer (Mr M. Ross), at yesterday's sitting of the Christchurch Manpower Appeal Committee. He made his remarks when the Williamson Construction Company failed to appear in the appeal by Andrew Alexander Moore against a direction to employment with the firm. The committee was Messrs K. G. Archer (chairman). H. Lee, and P. J. Kelly, with Mr N. R. Stanton as secretary. , The committee allowed the appeal ana appellant asked if the decision gave him a complete clearance. Mr Archer; Only as far as Williamsons is concerned. The Manpower Officer may direct you somewhere else. The direction of Leslie Ewart Freeman to A. and T. Burt. Ltd., was also withdrawn. . The appeal of Turner Hats, Ltd., and J. Roberts (secretary of the Clothing Trades Union) against the direction of Dons Betty Orrey to the Cashmere Sanatorium as a hospital aid, was struck out. the direction having been withdrawn. The appeal was heard on October 8 and ad-> journed . ... , The appeal of Emily Edna Ellen Ward against her direction to the Latex Rubber Company was dismissed. The appellant. a machinist, said her objection to working at Woolston was that her health was not good and she was on a diet. If she went to Woolston, she would be unable to go hr re for the midday meal. She had been rejected by the Air Force and had worked for four or five months before she be-, ame a machinist in a city factory after receiving the direction to Woolston.

The appeal of Thomas Marshall against the Manpower Officer's refusal of permission to terminate his employment with the New Zealand Railways was dismissed. In a statement, appellant said he had been working for four months in a goods shed. Tlie continuous walking affected his feet and lie suffered agony at night. He felt that if he continued to work at the shed his health would be undermined. “You are net allowed to sit down for five minutes,” ha said, “but as long as you walk round with a barrow and do nothing you are all right."

Mavis Eileen Beale appealed against the decision of the Manpower Officer in granting the Kaiapoi Woollen Manufacturing Company, Radley Mills permission to terminate her employment. The appeal was dismissed, the chairman remarking that the girl had committed a very serious breach of discipline, possibly without serious Intent or as a joke, and the company was within its right in applying for leave to dismiss her. A decision dismissing the appeal was given by a committee in the case heard before of James Shelley against iris transfer ns a railway surfaceman from Waikari to Parnassus, The department, as it was quite entitled to do under the regulations ordered the transfer, said the committee Shelley appealed on health grounds, but the committee obtained an independent medical report which did not bear out the appellant's case. "This is one man the railways will not he able to retain.” remarked Mr Archer when the committee dismissed the appeal by the District Traffic Manager against the decision of the Manpower Officer in granting Percy Reginald Smith permission to terminate his employment as a casual in the goods sheds. “The position is that we are very busy and we anticipate being very busy in the future." said the Traffic Manager (Mr G. H. McLean). Men in the' sheds were at present working up to 59 hours a week and also on Sundays, if required The department wanted another 20 men in the sheds. Evidence was given that Smith, who had been trained as a butcher, was now managing a butchery business for his sister, who was recently widowed and who was dependent on the business Tile committee held an Investigation into a report received from the Manpower Officer that Motorman W C. Watson had failed to exercise proper skill and care in the performance of his werk with the Christchurch Tramway Board As the board the union (Mr R L Ronpldsor.i, and the Manpower Officer agreed that this was not a case for prosecution, the cmnmittec decided to make no recommendation Mr N. R. Forbes (the union's secretary) suggested that before the board could suspend any man for an offence it had to get the permission of the Manpower Officer. It was said that Watson had been suspended by the board under its internal method of discipline, and the question was raised whether such suspension was "suspension." while dismissal was being considered, In terms of the regulations.