Conciliator criticises Empire Rubber

Press, 18 February 1983, Page 7

Conciliator criticises Empire Rubber

The industrial dispute at the Empire Rubber Mills in Christchurch had escalated out of all proportion to the resultant loss of income and production an industrial conciliator, Mr B. P. Gray, has said.

That could be partly attributed to the "scant regard" the company had paid to procedures open to it under the Industrial Relations Act and the rubber workers' award, he said. Mr Gray, the conciliator to whom the Canterbury Rubber Workers' Union referred the. dispute over safety allowances late last year, said that he was concerned about statements in "The Press" on Wednesday on procedures for settlements of disputes of right, especially concerning Empire Rubber Mills. Ltd. About 100 rubber workers at the mill have been on strike since February 4.

Mr Gray said that the Canterbury Employers’ Association and the management of Empire had expressed the view that they had the absolute right to decide how a dispute was to be conducted. "Until each side sits down as a committee and all facts are properly laid out before a chairman, nobody can decide the best avenue of approach." said Mr Gray. “This dispute was properly drawn to the employer’s at-

tention by the union some months ago. Failing settlement. an approach was made to the Conciliation and Mediation Service for a chairman to hear what the union believed was a dispute of right under the Industrial Relations Act and the award. A date, time, venue, and chairman were notified to the union, which properly made these facts available to the employer. No adverse comments as to these facts were heard from the employer and on the due date the union attended. The employer failed to attend the disputes committee hearing and did not advise the chairman at any time of its non-attend-ance or its stance." said Mr Gray.

"The law allows either party to a dispute to invoke the disputes procedure and this was done in this case by the union. The employer failed to attend and now says the chairman or conciliator would decide the case down the centre instead of looking at the award, law, or custom and practice. “This is wrong, as he or any party has the right to appeal against any part or whole of the committee’s decision to the Arbitration Court." he said.

“It would appear that because the union has not used an avenue to the Arbitration Court which the employer or

its adviser believes is the correct one. the employer has paid scant regard to other procedures, which has helped escalate jhe present dispute out of all proportion to the resultant loss of income and production." Mr Grav said