Court action unless meat workers end strikes

Press, 2 May 1984, Page 1

Court action unless meat workers end strikes

PA Wellington Freezing works companies will seek a court injunction to force workers back to work if rolling strikes continue.

The executive director of the Freezing Companies Association, Mr Peter Blomfield, said the strike action was illegal. The association had decided on behalf of the industry to seek an injunction from the Arbitration Court under the Commerce Act if there was no immediate return to work, he said. Mr Rod Ewan, a spokesman for the association, also said a big company, which he would not name, had already approached the Labour Department wanting action under the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act. Under the Act strikes in slaughterhouses are illegal unless three days notice is given. The national secretary of the Meat Workers Union, Mr A. J. Kennedy, said last evening that he had received no official notification of the proposed court injunctions. He would not comment until he heard something official which he expected to hear today. When asked for his response, earlier in the day, to the possibility of prosecutions for failure to give three days notice, Mr Kennedy had said that employers had known all along that there would be stoppages. The only thing that they had not known was that the actions would affect regions rather than, individual works each day.

If prosecutions were brought it would only compound the problem because it would drag other unions

and the Federation of Labour into the dispute, said Mr Kennedy. The West Coast (North Island) branch of the Meat Workers Union yesterday “drew the marble” for a 24hour strike, part of the union’s campaign to get the employers to agree to a joint approach to the Government for a full conciliation council. About 4500 freezing workers were involved in the strike yesterday which followed similar 24-hour action in Southland and Otago on Monday. Mr Blomfield said that the Freezing Companies Association had re-em-phasised its willingness to meet the union for discussions provided rolling strikes stopped immediately. The association would discuss matters which were not related to money. “We have already made this offer to the unions at a meeting on April 17. We explained that we could not support any increase in wages because of the effect this would have on costs. The $8 per week cost-of-living allowance will increase the industry wage bill by $lO million,” he said. “We suggested that rather than applying for an all-out exemption to go into conciliation council we attempt to discuss all the matters that had been raised and see if agreement could be reached. "We pointed out that under the existing wage freeze regulations there were provisions for exemptions for special circumstances and we stated we would be prepared to look at making applications for such special cases if they arose during our discussions. So it is simply not true that we are not prepared to meet with them,” Mr Blomfield said. Mr Kennedy said that the association had only to agree to make a joint approach to the Government for an exemption to the wage freeze regulations to get the union to call off its rolling stoppages. “They’d be silly not to agree. There should be no problem in agreeing to take a joint approach to the Government. The real problem is when we get to the Government.

Mr Kennedy said that the union wanted to discuss “the whole gamut” of the meat workers’ award, not just wages. A case could be made for an exemption to the wage freeze for the industry because a number of new developments had been tak-

ing place. One development which was irritating union members was that those who were working on woolpulling machines were being arbitrarily designated as wool classers and their wages lowered accordingly, he said. Farmers were urged yesterday to withhold stock from freezing works in protest against the rolling stoppages. Such a move would keep the killing chains idle. The action was proposed by Manawatu and Rangitikei Federated Farmers. Nothing would be achieved by withholding stock, said Mr Kennedy. Federated Farmers was “certainly not” calling for stock to be withheld in Canterbury, said the chairman of the meat and wool section in North Canterbury, Mr R. W. Davison. “The federation is obviously looking for a fairly strong stand but at the moment we’re still discussing it,” he said. The chairman of the meat and wool section of MidCanterbury Federated Farmers, Mr L. R. Kingsbury, said he did not think Mid-Canterbury farmers would want to withhold stock. His own view was that farmers should not become directly involved in the dispute, but should support action that the Freezing Companies Association might take in trying to limit wage rises. Mr Kennedy said that withholding stock would “only delay the kill and the stock would be eating their winter feed.” It could also mean that at a later date meat workers might retaliate by taking industrial action at a time when it would hurt farmers. “Its a stupid thing, and it would not aid and abet their cause,” Mr Kennedy said. In proposing the stock withholding action the secretary of the Manawatu and Rangitikei province, Mr Guido de Bres, said, “The freezing industry is at the crossroads, and the time has come for farmers to be counted. “Farmers must measure up the industry, recognise that this is the crunch and act accordingly.”

If farmers did not make a stand now, then they should not look to Federated Farmers for help next season, he said. Mr de Bres said that farmers could not be directed to withhold stock. “But we ,are asking each of them who propose sending stock to the works this week to examine their situation,” he said.