DIRECTION OF SKILLED WORKER

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24366, 19 September 1944, Page 3

DIRECTION OF SKILLED WORKER

ESSENTIALITY QUESTIONED An appeal by a printing press operator,' Henry Claude Lovell, against refusal, of permission to terminate his employment with the New Zealand Railways, Christchurch, came before the Industrial ■ Manpower Committee yesterday. The appellant had been returned to New Zealand on compassionate leave, and had since been placed on indefinite leave without pay and directed to essential work at the Addington workshops. The appellant stated that for five or six weeks he had been employed on sweeping the floor of the' workshops and the floors of trucks. He had also helped in cleaning up the vard, grubbing grass, and cleaning a drain. This work did not seem to him to be of vital importance. He would prefer to be employed at his own trade by Andrews Baty and Company, Ltd. Mr L. K. Brough, workshops manager of the Addington workshops, said that the work being done by the appellant had to be done by somebody: it was essential that the floors be kept clear. "The main thing to satisfy us about, is whether you are making, good use of this man,’’ said the chairman of the committee (Mr K. G. Archer). “Is it essential in the interests of the country that he be employed on this type of work? When questioned, Mr Brough said that it would be impossible to make use of the appellant’s technical skill.' “It is generally agreed that a man’s own skill will, not' necessarily be used in the industry he is directed to,” said the District Man-; power Officer (Mr M. Ross). Mr. P. J. Kelly asked whether it was not possible to • find a man more suitable than a printer for this type of work. “It is the old story, of a square peg in a round hole, said Mr K Mr Archer said that the committee’s sympathies were with the- appellant:, the question was what they could do for mm. The committee’s recommendation is, as follows:—“ This man is in the same;category as many ' others who have been brought back to New Zealand to enter essential Industry. He was therefore prooerly directed to the New Zealand >Rail* ways, for which work he had: volunteered. We nevertheless consider that a man so directed is entitled, to be released unless he is employed to work reasonably able. to his/capacitY and qualifications.; to the present case the appellant, has been employed at the Addington workshops for several weeks on work which we consider Is neither essential nor suitable for him, and unless the department Can make better use of his services we, consider, ne should be released or directed into other employment. We propose to fdjourn the case for two weeks to the department an opportunity to find the appellant more suitable work, failing which he will be released.”