No Settlement Of Islington Dispute

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30028, 12 January 1963, Page 10

No Settlement Of Islington Dispute

There was no killing of sheep and lambs at the Islington works of the New Zealand I Refrigerating Company yesterday, It was the ! second day on which stockmen asked the i company to pay for the hydatids dosing of all their dogs. \ The company which, as reauired in the I freezing workers* award, pays the £1 dosing fee for one dog a man to the Paparua County Council, again refused to extend the payment

The 11 stockmen offered to work one dog only. The company then refused to tender any stock on these tonne because the nee— ary spelling of the single dogs would disrupt the killing .operation. The slaughtermen, their assistants and the runner hands went home and will report for work on Monday. If killing does not resume then, other departments of the works will begin to be affected by the dispute. Under the award, the stockmen working dogs get an extra Bid an hour or 4s 2d a day. The company is required to provide shelter for all the dogs, food for them and faculties to cook it. The freezing workers’ award says that dog domng fees under the Hydatids Act. 1960, “shall be paid by the employer for one dog per stockman who is required to provide and work same by the employer." Stockmen commonly employ four to six dogs each. The shepherds at Islington stopped work on Thursday morning after they had been working one dog apiece from 8 a m. to 10 a.m. and then demanded an hour’s rest for the dogs. After talking to the shepherds yesterday morning, Mr

S Arnst, secretary of the Canterbury Freezing Workers’ Union, said: "We are working to the award.” The company however replies that the award does not fully set out the common practice of work to be followed. The union sought a change in the award on dosing fees in conciliation council proceedings last month. This was declined by the employers. The award also requires

that "the employer shall supply food and shelter for dogs up to the number he nominates.” Mr Arnst said last night that the union now asked the company to nominate the number of dogs it was prepared to find food and housing for under the terms of the award, “so that shepherds and stockmen can carry out their work and maintain production in the course of their daily duties so vital to the country.” He claimed that the company was avoiding its responsibility in paying the dosing fees for one dog for each man. There were considerable costs in paying various fess tor working dogs, he said.

It is understood that other works pay the dosing fees for one dog only. The general manager of toe company (Mr W. M. Cleland)

said yesterday: "There are constitutional jMsns for the settlement of disputes. Direct action tactics can only result in toes to aU parties.’’ The Labour Department has been in touch 'with both parties in this dispute. The assistant district supervisor for the department (Mr A. B. Tuck) said last night he would make no comment on the situation at present.