PROVISION FOR DISCUSSION

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 25061, 18 December 1946, Page 6

PROVISION FOR DISCUSSION

UNION’S OUTLINE OF NEGOTIATIONS

“The remarks passed at the City Council meeting, as reported, seem to have been made with the deliberate intention of misleading the public, and strong exception is taken to Cr. M. E. Lyons’s statement that the unions have not used the correct manner in obtaining improvements for the workers,” said Mr W. H. Mathison, secretary of the Christchurch Firemen’s Union yesterday, when discussing the negotiations for new hours for firemen. "The efforts of the unions have been made solely in an attempt to better the conditions of the firemen and to bring them into line with those of other workers and not merely to double the staff of the fire brigade.” Because the statements made at the meeting of the City Council gave “an entirely wrong impression,” a reply was called for, said Mr Mathison. The present Christchurch Fire Brigades’ Employees’ Award, which had been in operation since May 10, 1946, embodied a memorandum which read: “The assessors request that the following note be recorded:—The question of the inclusion in the award of provisions dealing with (a) where men have to turn out in open machines; (b) the adoption of the platoon system; and (c) annual holidays in accordance with the Annual Holidays Act, 1944, is, pending agreement on these issues between the N.Z. Fire Boards’ Association, or pending a decision of the Court, reserved for possible further action by the parties by way of joint application for an amendment to the award.”

In June of this year, the Fire Brigades’ Employees’ Federation met in Wellington- to discuss the memorandum, and an attempt was made then to arrange a meeting between the two associations. Representation was made to the Minister of Internal Affairs (the Hon. W. E. Perry) and a conference of all fire brigades’ unions was held to reach an agreement as to the minimum conditions required. It was decided to aim at 60 hours a week or the equivalent. A conference was then arranged between the Fire Boards’ Association, the Union Federation, and the Auckland Fire Brigades’ Union, which discussed the proposed 60-hour week, and the conference was adjourned to enable fire boards to discuss the proposals. That had evidently been done. “It is hard to understand Cr. Lyons, a member of the Fire Boqrd, when he says that the fire boards themselves had not been invited to the conference and that if their association had not taken a firm stand the boards might have found themselves suddenly committed to double their present expenditure. Cr. Lyons also resents the way the matter was handled. As fire boards form the Fire Boards’ Association, and as Mr T. M. Charters (chairman of the Christchfirch Fire Board) attended the conference, it would appear that Cr. Lyons is not fully conversant with the facts. He is also definitely wrong when he states that it was intended that the new system should be superimposed on the existing award without reference te the Arbitration Court; reference to the memorandum will show that he is wrong. “In my experience I have never previously known a question, discussed under committee conditions, being given publicity in the discussions by another public organisation, and, furthermore, in my opinion, the matter is sub-judice.” said Mr Mathison. He added that Cr. G. Manning had suggested a full report be obtained from the City Council’s three representatives on the Fire Board. The facts which the union was now stating should be included in any report by those representative!.