Short notice brings penalty

Press, 26 June 1978, Page 21

Short notice brings penalty

FA Auckland i An independent arbitrator has penalised a company for 1 abruptly reducing its' : employees’ pay, making the 1 case an unusual one outside j i civil or industrial law. At the same time, more i favourable compensations was awarded to members of h three unions who “acted |< responsibly” and did not j strike than to the members j of another union who wentj on strike for three weeks in [ protest against the wage i cuts. 11 By agreement, the case was heard by an industrial con-!' ciliator, Mr J. H. Bufton. (< The case, he said in a deci- i sion released this week, was( i not one of industrial rela-! ' tions, but of human relations, ( Because of the economicj' downturn, A.HI. Hygrade [ Packaging Company had [ planned to abandon its shift I < work and revert to a 40-hour I week. Employees who stood o to suffer considerable cuts in ! i take-home pay had been given about three weeks 11

notice of the end of shift work. Mr Bufton said that 12 weeks would have been reasonable notice. The companyhad known for a considerable time that cuts would have to be made. He awarded each of 20 employees, members of the engineering, printing, and clerical unions, .$350 (taxable) ; in compensation. I The strike action by store,men and packers, however, ■ could not be condoned. Of 17 storemen who went on strike. $525 compensation ' was awarded only to each ■ of three long-service ] employees. | In providing three weeks • notice of the changes, the I company was still acting ( within the terms of the ■employees’ work agreements, , and so the matter could not ! be put before Mr Bufton as a i dispute of industrial law. i The parties had agreed to appoint him as an independent chairman with the power to make a final and binding decision.