Warning Given Watersiders

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30575, 19 October 1964, Page 1

Warning Given Watersiders

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, October 18. There is little doubt that the waterfront unions do not intend to work tallow in bulk under the conditions of the Waterfront Industry Tribunal’s order, but only on terms dictated by the unions. Mr V. P. Blakely, general secretary of the Port Employers’ Association, said today.

“Port employers, obviously. cannot carry out their business under conditions where they are liable to be held up at any port at the whim of the local union and in complete defiance of the legal requirements of the tribunal’s order,” he said.

It was unfortunate, said Mr Blakeley, that in spite of the employers’ efforts after discussion with the Federation of Labour to have the loading of bulk tallow carried out by waterside workers in a reasonable manner under the terms of the tribunal’s order, "it was quite clear that the Waterside Workers’ Union at Lyttelton has decided that it will not honour the tribunal’s decision.”

Mr Blakeley said negotiations with the federation took place in Wellington last week in the hope of securing a measure of co-operation from the waterside workers. UNDERTAKING

“The port employers, while making it perfectly clear they would require observance of the tribunal’s order, nevertheless undertook that the order would be operated in a reasonable manner, and that it was not the intention of the employers to require men to work in torrential rain.

“It certainly appeared to the port employers that the federation wished there should also be co-operation and reasonableness on the part of the waterside workers.”

Mr Blakeley said the negotiations were only completed on Wednesday, “yet on Friday we have this further dispute arising with the Lyttelton union. “Two watersiders have already been placed on penalty, one for refusing to turn out and couple up the hose to a road tanker in light rain.” Another man, he said, was dismissed for refusing to carry out the same job, even after the rain had stopped, on the ground that the work was too arduous. “A measure of the more-than-reasonable approach adopted by the employer is that an offer was made to give this man the assistance of the spare man already employed on the ship. But this offer was rejected out of hand by union officials.” EMPLOYERS’ STAND

Mr Blakeley said the Port Employers’ Association had made it quite clear to the union at Lyttelton that no

fresh jobs will be started in the port, apart from the steamer-express service and replacements on jobs already working, until an undertaking was given to accept engagement and work tallow on the Kwangsi in accordance with the tribunal's order.

He said it was a great pity the union should have ignored the serious warning issued by the Minister of Labour (Mr Shand) on September 19 when he pointed out the folly of the course on which the unions seem to be embarked.

Mr Blakeley said it was the same tactics and refusal to accept conciliation and arbitration which caused the major waterfront upheaval in 1951. This cost New Zealand workers £3 million in wages and caused a tremendous economic loss to the country.