RAILWAYMEN’S ATTITUDE

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24372, 26 September 1944, Page 4

RAILWAYMEN’S ATTITUDE

“ DISLOCATION NOT THREATENED ” REPLY TO MINISTER’S STATEMENT “The railwayman are ‘part of the innocent public' mentioned by the Minister of Railways (the Hon. R. Semple),” said Mr A. B. Grant, secretary of the Canterbury branch of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, in a statement last night with reference to reported remarks by the Minister in Wellington on Monday Concerning the railwaymen’s threat- to hold a stop-work meeting on Thursday. i “No section stands isolated in or above society, and the railwayman who earn wages by working for the State are also responsible for the wages paid to a large section of ‘the innocent public’ ’’ said Mr Grant. “It is not, as Mr Semple says, the first, but the secohd time that a tribunal has been set up to discuss railwaymen’s wages and conditions. The decisions of the first tribunal, which were in favour of the railwaymen, had to be forced upon the Government of that day. “The decisions, no matter what they may be, of the present we have been told, are also conditional, and may be governed by. the wages stabilisation enactments. “It is correct to say that the tribunal has not yet had a chance, and we, ourselves, have stated so. What we do not intend to see is differentiation in the basic wage workers. Differentiation had been agreed to by our executive in its discussions with the department. It_ is for the executive to prove that its prior agreement to such differentiation can now be avoided. We seek to assist them by stating we will not permit it. It is difficult to reason in any other way than in the direction proposed by the branch with executive groups, which had widely advertised that the first demands moved be for a flat increase all round, and those same groups deliberately alter such proposals, and bring into play the worst aspects of sectionalism. “The Canterbury branch has made no threat of dislocation of traffic. Ail the branch desires is the presence of all members. The branch shall have that. The problem of traffic is one for the department. We also point out that our union negotiated with Mr Semple for many months on the same problem of wages, and negotiations were fruitless. If the Minister had met our claims then the present discussions would never have arisen.”