FIREMAN LEFT POST

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 24028, 17 August 1943, Page 7

FIREMAN LEFT POST

* —,— DISMISSAL BY BOARD REFUSED MANPOWER COMMITTEE’S DECISION The Manpower Officer’s decision to refuse the Christchurch Fire Board permission to dismiss a fireman who absented himself from his post without leave was upheld by the Industrial Manpower Committee yesterday. In dismissing the Fire Board’s appeal against this decision, the committee stated that the fireman’s case was exceptional, as he was acting under great mental stress. Mr K. G. Archer presided, and associated with him were Messrs P. J. Kelly and H. Lee. The superintendent of the Christchurch Fire Brigade (Mr A. Morrison) said that the case of the fireman, Trevor William' Shaw, was a clear case of a man who had deserted his post, not a case of a man being absent from work because of domestic trouble. Shaw was actually at work when he deserted his post. In all similar cases the men concerned had lost their employment. Four men in the last five years had deserted their posts and had been dismissed. Shaw had gone away to see his wife, who was in a delicate state of health, but he had made no application for special leave of absence, which was granted in all cases of sickness or death. Two calls had been received during the night that Shaw was away. He had been listed for the No. 1 engine, which was set aside for the high-value area of the city. Shaw knew that by his desertion extra work would be thrown on the rest of the crew. Question of Penalty “If men are going to be allowed to desert their posts and march off the station like Shaw without a penalty other men will be apt to take the same liberty,” said Mr Morrison. He added that the board had other means of penalising men in those circumstances, but it considered that no other penalty was adequate for a man who deserted his post. To Mr A. C. Brassington, who appeared for Shaw, Mr Morrison said that he was a good fireman with no blemishes on his record. He had been a first-class fireman for three years. In the four cases of desertion mentiond the reasons given in two cases were sickness, and in the other two the men had gone to parties. Mr Morrison said he had suggested to the Manpower Officer that if Shaw was dismissed he could be redirected back as a junior fireman for a war appointment at the same pay. He thought it would act as a deterrent to the rest of the brigade in the future. Shaw, in evidence, said he had received a message in the afternoon of the day of his desertion, that his wife had been despondent. He kept thinking about her, and just could not stand it any longer, so he walked out. He was so worried that he did not think of asking for leave. If permission were given to the board to dismiss him he would not accept a war-time appointment as a junior fireman. He would prefer to be discharged under those conditions. Mr Brassington submitted that it was not a case where a man had deserted his post for a selfish reason. Shaw was worried about his wife’s illness, had a "brainstorm,” and went home. His decision was due to mental stress as he had lost two children, and his wife was expecting another. The Manpower Officer (Mr M. Ross) said he had had great difficulty in finding suitable men for the brigade, as Grade A men were required. He was still of the opinion that the case could have been met with no serious effect on discipline by imposing a fine, which was within the board’s power under its regulations. Discipline of Brigade Dismissing the appeal, Mr Archer said the committee was in entire agreement with Mr Morrison that the discipline of the fire brigade must be maintained, and that for a fireman to absent himself from his post without leave was a very serious offence. The committee agreed that in general such an offence warranted instant dismissal. The committee thought, however, that each case had to be considered upon its merits, and that the present case was excepuonal in that the worker concerned was clearly acting under great mental stress, while his prior reputation was so high that the board, even if dismissal was approved, would welcome his direction back to employment as a fireman again. The committee did not favour this suggestion, and was of the opinion, particularly in view of the manpower situation, that as the board looked on Shaw as a man whom it could stiH employ with advantage, it should find some means of dealing with his offence under its own regulations without going so far as to dismiss him from its service.