Banana Ship Dispute

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29910, 25 August 1962, Page 10

Banana Ship Dispute

The dispute that has held the African Reefer idle at Lyttelton since 1 p.m. last

Wednesday seems more than ordinarily mischievous and senseless. The watersiders have been reluctant to give reasons for refusing to unload bananas from the ship; but the inference is that the watersiders have been led to believe that the use of the African Reefer to carry bananas from Samoa deprives New Zealanders of employment. This is a fallacy. To be transported successfully, bananas must be carried in refrigerated ships. The Union Steam Ship Company has three refrigerated ships, which can usually cope with the trade offering. At certain times of the year there is more trade than the three ships can handle, and at these times it has been the practice for other vessels to assist. Since the refrigerated ships on which New Zealand seamen are employed are fully engaged, and since bananas cannot be carried satisfactorily in other than refrigerated vessels, how do the water-

siders help New Zealand seamen by refusing to work an assisting ship? If they think that the Union Company can be coerced into building another refrigerated ship, the company’s answer is that such a vessel could not be fully employed, and if another ship were put into service the cost of handling the trade that offers over the whole year would be substantially increased. It is clear, therefore, that the watersiders’ action can have no other results than to reduce the amount of work available on the waterfront, deprive New Zealand consumers of fruit they want, and harm the economy of a Pacific island New Zealand has promised to help—all this without improving the employment prospects of New Zealand seamen. It is to be hoped that before Monday the watersiders will see that they have been badly advised; that the stand they have taken can do no-one good and can do themselves only harm; and that they will resume work as the Port Conciliation Committee has directed.