Rubber men on indefinite strike

Press, 24 October 1980, Page 3

Rubber men on indefinite strike

Tyre production at the Firestone Tire and Rubber Company’s plant in Christchurch has ■ stopped because of an indefinite strike by the rubber workers employed by the company.

The Works manager, Mr V. W. West, said the action would halt the production of more than 2000 tyres a day, jeopardise exports, and jeopardise the future job security of the workers. He did not think there would be any resumption of - work until at least a week from today.

The’ indefinite strike comes after a 24-hour strike which halted production on Tuesday.

The strike is over a dispute about whether the company should negotiate an industrial award for its laboratory technicians, who are at present on the salaried staff. There are 23 of them, 16 of whom have joined the Canterbury Rubber Workers’ Union and want the union to negotiate an award for them. The dispute went to a conciliator, Mr B. P. Gray, who referred it to the Arbitration Court. The court ruled that it was unable to find any clear indication from the evidence submitted that the majority of technicians wanted an award. The workers’ representative on the court, Sir Leonard Hadley, dissented from the decision of Judge J. P. R. Horn and Mr P. Oldham.

The union’s secretary, Mr L. G. Morel, said that the strike would continue until either the company said it was prepared to enter meaningful negotiations or a date was fixed for a court rehearing so that the union could present more evidence, inJcuidng affadavits by 15 technicians that they wanted an award.. Mr West said the com-

pany believed the, technicians were well cared for already under the company's salary policy and could not see why the union had to take direct action to try to force its way. The workers could have carried on working while the union got a date for a rehearing, he said. The company had told the union that if the court decided that a need was established for an award, the company would “sit down and negotiate.”

i Mr West said the union had been warned that the workers were in breach of their award and unless the action was called Off, no work would be made available.

“The company is not prepared to be clobbered into submission,” said Mr West. Mr Morel said the technicians were dissatisfied with the treatment they had received from the company. Two years ago they had made an approach to join the union but did not when the company offered a big salary increase and promised to look after them.

“The majority accepted that but found that on two occasions the company had altered the agreement adversely and as a result they approached the union and said they could no longer rely on the company’s gentleman’s agreement,” said Mr Morel. Mr Morel said that the union’s rules had been changed to make provision for the technicians.

The Registrar of Industrial Unions had endorsed the rule change. The technicians had.also had a ballot on the unqualified preference clause, and voted 62 per cent in favour of a clause to be inserted in an award.