Cement union sticks to principles — ballot plans delayed

Press, 4 October 1977, Page 1

Cement union sticks to principles — ballot plans delayed

All is not well in Takaka, scene of the Government’s proposed first ballot on compulsory unionism. Faced with officials, and conditions, the tiny local union is digging its toes in.

The timing, voting method and wording of the ballot is still far from certain, the Press Association reports. After a full day of negotiations yesterday between the guinea-pig union, the Golden Bay Cement Workers’ Union, and Department of Labour officials, no definite plans have been made. The 180-strong union — represented by its president (Mr J. Visser) and its secretary (Mr J. Smith) — wants a ballot-box vote, rather than the postal vote favoured by he Department of Labour. It is also asking the Registrar of Industrial Unions (Mr R. A. Quay) for union rights to scrutinise the roll and the result of the ballot In Golden Bay with Mr Quay are Mr N. P. Williamson, assistant legal secretary with the department, and Mr R. J. Cave

the department’s Nelson district officer. The research officer for the Federation of Labour (Mr D. B. McDonald) is there to help the union. Inquiries at the cement works after negotiations ended yesterday revealed that the D partment of Labour officials seem certain to concede to the union the right to scrutinise the roll and ballot, although they are not required to do so under the Industrial Relations Amendment Act. Howeve., it seems unlikely they will agree to a ballot-box vote. Already, the department men are trying to make arrangements to get home addresses of union members. Mr Visser says his union does not have the addresses, and cannot get them at short notice because the men work different shifts, and their homes are "scattered all over the bay."

He ruled out any possibility of the ballot’s being held today because of this. Asked when the ballot would be held, Mr Quay said he had not decided, but the date would depend on the outcome of the talks with the union. "We are just here to talk over the situation with the union, and will make a decision with them on the running of the ballot,” he said. He denied a charge in the latest issue of the “Law Journal,” by a former Registrar of Industrial Unions and Secretary of Labour, Mr N. S. Woods, that the registrar had “a blank cheque for corrupt practice” under the Industrial Relations Amendment Act. “The act does not give me that chance. The mere fact the registrar is here discussing the matter with the union indicates he wants the ballot run in such a manner that he is

happy, and the union is happy.” During yesterday’s talks, the Golden Bay union members were shown a specimen voting form that might be used in the ballot. It asked the voter to tick whether he was for or against the unqualified preference clause in the collective agreement. Asked about the union’s reaction to the talks, Mr Visser said he still regarded the ballot as a “gross interference by the Government in union affairs.” However, he said he was much happier now that he had met the department officials who would be running it. Union members questioned shared their president’s view that “the ballot is a waste of the taxpayer’s money.” They said it would reflect a healthy vote of confidence in the union. Union ballot law criticised, Page 6.